This Fact Pack focuses on the success and effectiveness of the federal National Environmental Protection Act (“NEPA”) and state environmental quality acts (SEQAs or “little NEPAs”). Because SEQAs are often based on the federal model, the same successes can result from both the state and federal versions.

NEPA helps ensure that government decisions are more environmentally-friendly.

• The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requires agencies to take a “hard look” at possible environmental consequences before they make a final decision on a proposed action.(1)
• Federal agencies today are better informed about and more responsible for the consequences of their actions than they were before NEPA was passed.(1)
• In one example of how NEPA can promote pro-environment decisions, an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) conducted in Connecticut for a expressway permit application found the following: (1) the project would significantly degrade wetlands in the area; (2) the state had no plan for mitigating the impacts on the wetlands; and, (3) there was another practicable alternative to meet the project’s purpose and need—widening the existing highway—that had less impact on wetlands. The Corps of Engineers subsequently denied the state’s permit for the new expressway based on the EIS findings.(1)
• NEPA’s focus on an interdisciplinary approach to investigating the future implications of current actions inherently leads to an emphasis on the sustainability of natural systems, a fundamental aspect of effective ecosystem management.(1)
• One example of a successful SEQA is the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), which allows for the most broad focus of review of any California environmental review authority.(2)

The NEPA process can save money.

• In order to comply with NEPA more effectively, the Department of Energy (“DOE”) revised its scoping and analysis process for a project dealing with the problems of hydrogen generated in underground radioactive waste storage tanks. As a result, the DOE implemented a modified proposal that saved about $435 million.(1)

NEPA encourages public participation in government decision-making processes.

• Agency representatives report that upon consulting with the public during the NEPA process, they accept public views on their proposals and respond to those views.(1)
• NEPA has enabled agencies like the DOE to move from secrecy to public disclosure and involvement. For example, under Secretary Watkin, the DOE notified affected states and tribes of DOE’s intent to prepare Environmental Assessments (“EAs”), provided opportunity for the public to review analyses before agency approval, and prepared Mitigation Action Plans to minimize or eliminate adverse environmental impacts in certain EISs and EAs.(1)

NEPA promotes collaboration between government and community.

• A study conducted to determine the effectiveness of NEPA found that the Act’s most enduring legacy is a framework for collaboration between federal agencies and those who will bear the environmental, social and economic impacts of their decisions.(1)
• NEPA helps managers make better decisions, produce better results, and build trust in surrounding communities.(1)
• NEPA also calls for agencies to consult with state, local, and tribal governments concerning their proposed actions, and provides agencies with a mechanism to coordinate overlapping jurisdictional responsibilities.(1)

NEPA increases employee efficiency.

• Agency managers who have learned to use NEPA have discovered it helps them do their jobs. It can make it easier to discourage poor proposals, reduce the amount of documentation needed down the road, and promote innovations.(1)

NEPA promotes sustainable development.

• Strategic use of NEPA is proving to be a useful mechanism for attaining the sustainable development of communities. In a recent example, the Corps of Engineers used a programmatic EIS for the coastal Louisiana restoration plan to provide for early public comment on an ecosystem-based plan. In the multi-state southern Appalachian region, several federal agencies coordinated NEPA analyses for the entire ecosystem. These analyses are founded on a local vision for the region developed through public participation under the Southern Appalachian Man and Biosphere (SAMAB) program. SAMAB’s vison reflects the strategic planning goals of NEPA, which SAMAB identified as “the achievement of a sustainable balance between the conservation of biological diversity, compatible economic uses, and cultural values.”(1)