Importance of the National Environmental Policy Act

Today, U.S. Representative Mike Quigley (IL-05) entered the following statement into the Congressional Record.

Mr. Quigley. Mr. Speaker, We need to do more to protect our environment, not less.

Last month, for the first time in six years, the House passed a water infrastructure bill. For the first time in six years, Congress authorized crucial investments in our ports and inland waterways. And for the first time in six years, we addressed flood risk management, hurricane and storm damage risk reduction, and environmental restoration.

The Water Resource Reform and Development Act will strengthen our national water transportation network to improve our competitiveness, create more jobs, and grow our economy. But unfortunately, Mister Speaker, it came at a cost.

This vital legislation coupled investments in our nation’s aging infrastructure with the further weakening of one of this nation’s most important environmental protections: The National Environmental Policy Act.

For more than four decades, the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, has provided the foundation for countless improvements in our environmental laws. It gives us cleaner water, cleaner air, and a safer and healthier environment. It provides critical checks and balances on federal planning and decision making, requiring the federal government to consider environmental impacts. And it gives the public the opportunity to voice their concerns about the impact of federal actions on their health, safety, environment, and community.

This collaborative review process engages millions of Americans along with federal and state agencies, and forces the federal government to think outside the box and consider better alternatives.

Over the years, NEPA has saved money, time, and resources. It has also protected endangered species, public lands and historical sites, all while producing better projects with more public support. For example, when the Army Corp of Engineers planned to repair existing breakwaters and replace the lock gates of Chicago’s harbor, NEPA revealed a better method of repairing and extending the life of the breakwaters at a fraction of the cost. NEPA has proven that it’s possible to protect the environment and save the taxpayer money at the same time.

Unfortunately, misperceptions about this foundational environmental law are driving congressional attempts to chip it away. NEPA is frequently blamed as the leading cause of project delays when, in reality, lack of funding is actually to blame. We fault NEPA, when we should be blaming ourselves.

We continue to slash funding for Army Corp construction despite the American Society of Civil Engineers’s D-minus rating of our nation’s inland waterways. We can eliminate project delays and protect the environment at the same time, but a more serious investment in our infrastructure is needed to do so.

Instead the WRRDA bill passed last week alters the NEPA process, weakening environmental protections at a time when they are needed the most. This WRRDA has made it more difficult for the public to comment on environmental impacts by limiting the comment period to as little as 60 or 30 days, depending on the type of project. Environmental review statements are often hundreds of pages long and full of critical scientific research.

Many critics argue this is barely enough time to read and understand a review, let alone consult experts and submit informed public comments. These new arbitrary and unreasonably short deadlines hurt community voices in speaking out against harmful projects and penalize agencies for fulfilling their responsibility to fully deliberate on important environmental issues.

Good science takes time, and the proposed changes to the environmental review process give experts little time to adequately evaluate the impacts of a project. Environmental reviews are a crucial tool for improving transportation projects and safeguarding the environment.

An informed public engagement process produces ideas, information and even solutions the government might otherwise have overlooked. Streamlining current NEPA provisions carelessly hurts our ability to make better decisions that protect our health, our homes and our environment.

Meeting our transportation needs and protecting our environment are not mutually exclusive objectives.

NEPA, Mister Speaker, is the solution not the problem.