Trump’s Efforts to Reform Environmental Impact Statements Draw Cheers and Jeers

The Epoch Times ^ | February 17, 2020 Updated: February 17, 2020 | Kevin Mooney

[E. Pluribus Unum]

President Donald Trump’s efforts to streamline, accelerate and modernize the environmental review process could curtail abusive litigation practices that undermine economic development and jeopardize national security, according to congressional figures and energy policy analysts.

The 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act, which has not been revised since 1986, has been weaponized by anti-development groups to delay vital federal infrastructure projects and exploited to serve as a tool for excessive litigation to the detriment of America’s military readiness, they argue.

But Trump’s proposed overhaul of NEPA, which he officially announced during a White House press conference in January, has also been the subject of intense criticism from environmental advocacy groups that have been among the most aggressive litigators targeting federal construction projects and military exercises.

Some of these same environmental groups have also come under scrutiny for potential violations of foreign agent registration requirements since their litigation practices appear to align with the geopolitical interests of foreign powers, according to congressional correspondence.

Proposed Reforms

NEPA stipulates that federal agencies must consider the environmental impact of any federal actions that could significantly impact the quality of the environment. The law also says that federal agencies must consider potential alternatives to proposed actions. Current regulations call for federal agencies to produce documents called environmental impact statements (EISs) in anticipation of any significant federal actions and to prepare environmental assessments (EAs) to determine if the environmental statement is necessary or to explain why it is not.

[BBB333]

The Epoch Times is a great paper.

[Rumplemeyer]

First thing to eliminate is the provisions that the legal expenses of the challengers are paid by the government agency being sued, win or loose.

This would stop 99% of this lawfare litigation, loosing the suite and owing millions in legal fees is a sobering thought.

[Balding_Eagle]

Some of these same environmental groups have also come under scrutiny for potential violations of foreign agent registration requirements since their litigation practices appear to align with the geopolitical interests of foreign powers, according to congressional correspondence.

About time