NEPA 101Minnesota DOT
Environmental Stewardship & Streamlining Workshop
March 31, 2009
Dave Gamble – FHWA Resource Center EnvironmentTechnical Service Team
NEPA 101 Objectives Background and Basics of NEPA
When does NEPA apply?
FHWA Project Development Process
How has NEPA been working?
Recent developments
Where Did NEPA Come From?
Post WW II prosperity and growth was notoccurring without some cost
Highly publicized disasters and trends
Growing public awareness and concern
Eventual overwhelming sentiment for Federalgovernment to take leadership
Effects of DDT on foodsupply; Rachel Carson
founder of modernenvironmental
movement (1962)
Widely publicized SantaBarbara CA oil well
blowout (1969)
Worsening air pollutionleads to passage of
Clean Air Acts of 1963and 1970
National Environmental Policy Act
NEPA of 1969 (signed January 1, 1970)
Established Nat’l environmental policy & goals
Required agency disclosure of impacts ofproposed actions & possible mitigation
Created basis for environmental impactstatements (EIS) for major Federal actions
Created Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ –monitors Federal actions, provides overallguidance, tracks trends and resources)
NEPA – Sections 101 and 102 101 – National policy is to create conditions
under which humans and nature can exist inproductive harmony
101 – fulfill social, economic, and otherrequirements of present and futuregenerations
102 – "action forcing" provisions that form thebasic framework for Federal decision makingand the NEPA process, or … theenvironmental process basics
Environmental Process Basics
Interdisciplinary evaluations
Interagency coordination & public involvement
Consideration of alternatives
Mitigation and enhancement
Integration with other laws, regulations, etc.
Better decisions, not better documents
Reducing paperwork and delay
When Does NEPA Apply?
Broadly, when a Federal agency intends to carryout, fund, or approve a proposed action
Some actions are excluded from NEPA
Must determine if others will cause significantimpacts
When Does NEPA Apply? (cont’d)
For FHWA, basically when a project is proposedfor Federal-aid Highway Funding
Action – highway or transit project proposed forFHWA funding, but …
… actions also include activities such asmultiple use permits or changes in accesscontrol that may or may not involve commitmentof funds
What Must be Considered? SEE – Social, Economic, Environmental Natural and “built” environments Differing legal standards does not mean one
resource is more valuable than another Agencies must take a “hard look” at
consequences of actions and keep publicinformed
NEPA goal: prevent uninformed decisions versusunwise ones
What are Classes of Actions?
Categorical Exclusion (CE) – actions which do notindividually or cumulatively have a significant effect onthe human environment
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) – detailed writtenstatement on major Federal actions significantly affectingthe human environment
Environmental Assessment (EA) – significance ofenvironmental impact is not clearly established; todetermine the appropriate environmental documentrequired
Where’s the Instruction Manual?
NEPA … barely five pages long
CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508)
FHWA (and FTA) regulations (23 CFR 771)
Tons of supplemental guidance, policypapers, technical memos, initiatives,research, cutting edge technologies; lawsuitsalso influential
FHWA Project Development ProcessTransportation decision makingEnvironmental Streamlining &
StewardshipPublic Involvement & Interagency
CoordinationCompliance & Documentation
National Environmental Policy ActSection 4(f) (Parks/Historic Sites)Section 106 of the NHPA (Historic)Wetlands - 404(b)(1) (Clean Water Act)Endangered Species ActTitle VI (CRA), Environmental JusticeOther laws, regulations, and EOs ...
Where the Umbrella Comes In
“To the fullest extent possible, all environmentalinvestigations, reviews, and consultations becoordinated as a single process, and compliancewith all applicable environmental requirements bereflected in the environmental document requiredby this regulation.”
23 CFR 771.105(a)
Input from Planning Process LinkingPlanning and NEPA
Regional traffic forecasting & demand
Project-level traffic analysis (and updates)
Land use assumptions and scenarios
Public, political, interest-based input
Air quality conformity analysis
Financial viability
MPO as partner and contributor during NEPA
Decisions Made During NEPA
Project purpose and need
Range of alternatives to evaluate
Mode choice, scale (# lanes), type (bridge vs.tunnel), level of service, safety
Design concept and scope
Preferred (and ultimately selected) alternative
Mitigation and enhancement measures
Is NEPA Working? CEQ 25th Anniversary Report (1997):
• Interagency coordination has minimized conflicts andimproved permitting
• Tendency for litigation-proofing of projects• Not broken, but implementation is uneven
CEQ NEPA Task Force (2003):• Methods to modernize NEPA for more effective, efficient,
& timely process• Collaboration during NEPA; Citizen’s Guide; and aligning
NEPA with environmental management systems
http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/nepanet.htm
Other Developments & Initiatives
House of Representatives NEPA Task Force(July 2006)
• Time & cost to complete process
• Public participation
Emphasis on “User Friendly” Documents
FHWA Vital Few Goal of EnvironmentalStewardship and Streamlining
Linking Planning and NEPA
SAFETEA-LU, what did you do? 6002 – Efficient Environmental Reviews for
Project Decision Making 6003 – State Assumption of Responsibility for
Recreational Trails & TransportationEnhancement Programs
6004 – State Assumption of Responsibility forCategorical Exclusions
6005 – Surface Transportation ProjectDelivery Pilot Program
6007 & 6009 – Section 4(f) Provisions
Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
SAFETEA-LU – Section 6002
Efficient Environmental Reviews for ProjectDecision Making
Creates a new environmental review processsimilar to existing but with twists
Mandatory for EIS, optional for others
Emphasizes responsibility for determiningpurpose and need, & range of alternatives
New “participating” agency category
Enhanced public involvement
Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
Requires “coordination plan” Encourages developing a schedule Ability to develop preferred alternative to higher level
of detail for mitigation/compliance 180-day statute of limitations for lawsuits
Training – nhi.gov FHWA Final Guidance on SAFETEA-LU
Environmental Review Process
SAFETEA-LU – Section 6002 (cont’d)
“Thanks to the visionary act of Congress …, ourFederal government and the American public
today have the benefit of a wealth of informationon the state of the environment and on the
potential environmental impacts of major Federalactions. NEPA is at its core, a mandate for
informed, democratic decision making and itscontribution to environmental protection is
incalculable.”
1997 CEQ Annual Report on Environmental Quality