The Wilderness Society
HomeContact UsSite Map
Go button
 
About UsJoin and DonateNewsroomLibraryOur IssuesWhere We WorkTake Action
Our Issues Banner
bullet
NEPA Home
bullet
NEPA Final Hearing



  Subscribe to WildAlerts
 Go



  Support Our Work
Donate




 

National Environmental Policy Act
Bedrock legislation of environmental protection faces threats from Congress and Bush Administration
 
 
 
 

Enacted in 1970 by overwhelming bi-partisan majorities, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) establishes a national policy calling for "productive harmony" between man and nature. The law directs federal agencies to take into account, and publicly disclose, the environmental consequences of their proposed actions.

Apart from improving the substance of agency decisions, NEPA reinforces the democratic system by providing an avenue for citizens to comment upon and influence government decisions that affect their lives. NEPA is a law that puts people before politics and values science over short-term thinking by requiring that the public is involved and the environmental impacts of proposed projects are disclosed. This common sense "look before you leap" requirement leads to better decisions and helps the government avoid making mistakes.

Threat to NEPA
The Republican staff of the House Resources Committee's NEPA Task Force released a draft report of their initial findings and proposals on December 21, 2005. Despite the fact that 10 former members of the Council on Environmental Quality -- representing both political parties -- and more than 200 law professors have said that NEPA does not need any legislative changes, 13 of the draft proposals would amend existing statutory law, including re-writing key definitions within NEPA and distorting established jurisprudence and common law.

Among the many proposals that would significantly weaken NEPA, some of the most serious would:

  1. Add mandatory timelines for the completion of NEPA documentation and only allow for occasional extensions;
  2. Place significant restrictions on a citizen's ability to participate in the public process and to challenge an agency's decision-making process; and
  3. Require that "reasonable alternatives" including those proposed by individual citizens or community groups, be supported by "feasibility and engineering studies," including those proposed by individual citizens or community groups. Ordinary citizens and few organizations have the technical or financial resources to prepare such studies, where as industry often has more ample resources to do so.

Additional Resources


 
 
Masthead photos courtesy The Wilderness Society, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and Jeff Henry.
Our Privacy Policy
1615 M St, NW Washington, DC 20036 1.800.THE.WILD