National Environmental Policy Act Processes Research Articles

US Forest Service Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act: Fast, Variable, Rarely Litigated, and Declining

AbstractAbstractThis paper draws on systematic data from the US Forest Service’s (USFS) Planning, Appeals and Litigation System to analyze how the agency conducts environmental impact assessments under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). We find that only 1.9 percent of the 33,976 USFS decisions between 2005 and 2018 were processed as Environmental Impact Statements, the most rigorous and time-consuming level of analysis, whereas 82.3 percent of projects fit categorical exclusions. The median time to complete a NEPA analysis was 131 days. The number of new projects has declined dramatically in this period, with the USFS now initiating less than half as many projects per year as it did prior to 2010. We find substantial variation between USFS units in the number of projects completed and time to completion, with some units completing projects in half the time of others. These findings point toward avenues for improving the agency’s NEPA processes.

Risk Tradeoffs in Adaptive Ecosystem Management: The Case of the U.S. Forest Service

Natural resource planning processes on public lands in the United States are driven in large part by the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which dictates general processes for analyzing and disclosing the likely impacts of proposed actions. The outcomes of these processes are the result of multiple factors, many related to the manifold smaller incremental decisions made by agency personnel directing the processes. Through interviews with decision makers, team leaders, and team members on five NEPA processes within the U.S. Forest Service, this study examines those incremental decisions. Risk, in particular external relationship risk, emerged as a dominant lens through which agency personnel weigh and make process-related decisions. We discuss the tradeoffs associated with agency actors' emphasis on this form of risk and their potential implications for adaptive ecosystem management and organizational performance.

Adding ecosystem services to environmental impact analyses: More sequins on a “bloated Elvis” or rockin' idea?

Ecologists and economists have promoted the concept of ecosystem services as a means of assisting environmental decision-making. Currently, several U.S. federal agencies and international institutions are incorporating the ecosystem services approach into their decision-making processes. Since 1999, the concept has been included in guidance documents for environmental impact assessments under the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). More recently, the U.S. Forest Service approved a Planning Rule to include ecosystem services in Forest Plans. However, some people already describe the U.S. Forest Service NEPA process as cumbersome, which might be compounded by adding new layers of analysis. To assess the potential of incorporating ecosystem services into land management decisions, we surveyed over 500 U.S. Forest Service professionals about incorporating ecosystem services in environmental impact analysis processes. Our goal was to determine (a) whether and how the ecosystem services concept is currently used in Forest Service NEPA analyses, (b) staff perceptions about how influential NEPA guidance documents are, and (c) whether respondents think that the ecosystem services concept is useful in NEPA processes (and more broadly in environmental decision-making). Forty-one percent of respondents were unfamiliar with ecosystem services, but a majority of the respondents thought that ecosystem services could be helpful in the NEPA process. Opinions were divided about whether or not ecosystem services would improve communication with stakeholders. One finding with potentially broad implications for executive branch policy-making is that survey results indicate that U.S. Forest Service staff found Environmental Protection Agency and Council on Environmental Quality guidance documents less influential than internal Forest Service directives. At the same time, the guidance documents that include ecosystem services language were the least influential among the guidance documents listed in the survey. Applying the results as a case study to advance ecosystem services scholarship, we suggest clarification of the ecosystem services framework, metrics, and guidance.

Project risk and appeals in U.S. Forest Service planning

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires U.S. Forest Service planning processes to be conducted by interdisciplinary teams of resource specialists to analyze and disclose the likely environmental impacts of proposed natural resource management actions on Forest Service lands. Multiple challenges associated with these processes have been a source of frustration for the agency. One of these challenges involves administrative appeals through which public entities can challenge a Forest Service decision following a NEPA process. These appeals instigate an internal review process and can result in an affirmation of the Forest Service decision, a reversal of that decision, or additional work that re-initiates all or part of the NEPA process. We examine the best predictors of appeals and their outcomes on a representative sample of 489 Forest Service NEPA processes that were decided between 2007 and 2009. While certain factors associated with pre-existing social contexts (such as a history of controversy) or pre-determined elements of a proposed action (such as the extraction of forest products) predispose certain processes to a higher risk of appeals, other practices and process-related strategies within the control of the agency also appear to bear meaningful influence on the occurrence of appeals and their outcomes. Appeals and their outcomes were most strongly related to programmatic, structural (turnover of personnel in particular), and relationship risks (both internal and external) within the processes, suggesting the need for greater focus within the agency on cultivating positive internal and external relationships to manage the risk of appeals.

Decision making, procedural compliance, and outcomes definition in U.S. forest service planning processes

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) dictates a process of analyzing and disclosing the likely impacts of proposed agency actions on the human environment. This study addresses two key questions related to NEPA implementation in the U.S. Forest Service: 1) how do Interdisciplinary (ID) team leaders and decision makers conceptualize the outcomes of NEPA processes? And 2), how does NEPA relate to agency decision making? We address these questions through two separate online surveys that posed questions about recently completed NEPA processes – the first with the ID team leaders tasked with carrying out the processes, and the second with the line officers responsible for making the processes' final decisions. Outcomes of NEPA processes include impacts on public relations, on employee morale and team functioning, on the achievement of agency goals, and on the achievement of NEPA's procedural requirements (disclosure) and substantive intent (minimizing negative environmental impacts). Although both tended to view public relations outcomes as important, decision makers' perceptions of favorable outcomes were more closely linked to the achievement of agency goals and process efficiency than was the case for ID team leaders. While ID team leaders' responses suggest that they see decision making closely integrated with the NEPA process, decision makers more commonly decoupled decision making from the NEPA process. These findings suggest a philosophical difference between ID team leaders and decision makers that may pose challenges for both the implementation and the evaluation of agency NEPA. We discuss the pros and cons of integrating NEPA with decision making or separating the two. We conclude that detaching NEPA from decision making poses greater risks than integrating them.

Using a Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Model to Streamline and Enhance NEPA and Public Participation Processes

The use of existing data from remote sensing technologies, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and economic modeling can be integrated in a visual Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) tool that can aid in streamlining and enhancing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and public participation. The interoperability of different data outputs provides researchers and practitioners the ability to produce high quality visualizations that can enhance the communication of proposed projects and the projected economic and social impacts on a community and surrounding area. User priority and value inputs combined with the high quality visualizations in a MCDM tool can provide multiple alignment alternatives for each transportation project participant. By providing additional and improved data through a new decision-making tool, ECO-PAL, researchers and practitioners will be able to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the efforts regarding NEPA development and make “every day count.”

From the office to the field: Areas of tension and consensus in the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act within the US Forest Service

We conducted an online survey ( n = 3321) followed by five focus groups with Forest Service employees involved in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to explore agency views of how NEPA should be implemented within the agency. We filter these perceptions through the lenses of different functional groups within the agency, each with its own role in agency compliance with NEPA and its own suite of perceived accountabilities. In doing so, we uncover areas of consensus regarding valued practices as well as tensions between employees with different roles in NEPA compliance. General consensus exists regarding the importance of the effective functioning of interdisciplinary teams, but opinions about what constitutes an effective team vary. Findings suggest that NEPA serves as a playing field for competing accountabilities felt by line officers, disciplinary specialists, and advisory personnel within the agency, as each attempts to exert influence over NEPA processes and their outcomes.

The meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act within the U.S. Forest Service

We conducted a survey of 3321 Forest Service employees involved in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) followed by five focus groups to investigate agency views of the purpose of agency NEPA processes and their appropriate measures of success. Results suggest the lack of a unified critical task for Forest Service NEPA processes and that employees' functions relevant to NEPA influence their views of its meaning. Compared to other agency personnel, members of interdisciplinary teams who carry out most day-to-day NEPA-related tasks placed greater emphasis on minimizing negative environmental and social impacts, satisfying multiple stakeholders and avoiding litigation and appeals. Line officers, who typically serve as the decision makers following NEPA processes, placed greatest emphasis on efficient implementation and least emphasis on minimizing impacts. Advisory personnel placed greatest emphasis on effective disclosure of analyses and decision-making. We discuss the structural origins of these differences as well as their implications.

Libby North Corridor Study

The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) developed the corridor-planning process to bridge the gap between its statewide long-range transportation policy plan and project-level National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) processes. MDT cooperated with Lincoln County, Montana; the USDA Forest Service; and FHWA to complete the Libby North Corridor Study. The approach used new rules and regulations: 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 450, Appendix A: Linking the Transportation Planning and NEPA Processes. Corridor planning complements NEPA and ensures that decisions are made at the appropriate level with consideration of low-cost alternatives and available funding. Environmentally complex issues in the Pipe Creek area, north of Libby, prompted the study. It was uncertain whether any project was possible on this secondary highway (MT-567) because of its environmentally challenging location: parallel to Pipe Creek (Bull Trout Critical Habitat), within the Kootenai National Forest and grizzly bear habitat distribution area, and just outside the Cabinet–Yaak grizzly bear recovery zone. If this project had been developed under traditional methods beginning with the NEPA-compliant environmental review, a full environmental impact study would have been likely. Concerned that any reconstruction would be insurmountable and not fundable because of environmental sensitivities, MDT and the county took a step back. The corridor was reassessed at the planning level to obtain a better understanding of corridor limitations and needs and to determine what improvements, if any, could be pursued. With the aid of many stakeholders and agencies, the study identified recommendations for improving safety, maintaining the scenic character of the corridor, and minimizing impacts to threatened and endangered species.

Visions of success and achievement in recreation-related USDA Forest Service NEPA processes

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is incorporated into the planning and decision-making culture of all natural resource agencies in the U.S. Yet, we know little about how the attitudes and internal interactions of interdisciplinary (ID) teams engaged in NEPA processes influence process outcomes. We conducted a web-based survey of 106 ID team leaders involved with environmental analyses (EA) or environmental impact statements (EIS) for projects dealing with recreation and travel management on national forests. We explore how they define success in these processes and identify factors most powerfully associated with perceptions of positive outcomes. The survey revealed a tremendous diversity in definitions of success. Strong correlations between the perceived importance of particular indicators of success and their achievement suggest that pre-conceived notions may often help to shape process outcomes. Regression analyses revealed the following factors as the best predictors of ID team leaders' perception of an “excellent outcome”: achievement of the agency mission, whether compromise had taken place between the interested parties, team satisfaction and harmony, timely process completion, and project implementation. Yet, respondents consistently ranked compromise with interested parties and team member satisfaction among the least important measures of successful NEPA processes. Results suggest that clarifying appropriate measures of success in NEPA processes across the agency could make ID team performance more consistent. The research also suggests that greater attention to ID team interactions, both internally and between teams and interested publics, could result in better outcomes.

Strengthening the Link between Project Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment: The Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment Dialogue Process

An approach to stakeholder involvement known as the Dialogue process has been an integral part of the US Department of Defense Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) Program from its inception. It has provided a means of soliciting stakeholder input before key decisions are made. The projects developed under the ACWA Program are characterized as major federal actions and therefore also must meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). One of these is the requirement for public participation in the environmental impact assessment process. This case study describes the ACWA Dialogue and NEPA processes, and examines their relationship in the implementation of the ACWA Program. The examination suggests that involving the public at the beginning of a program through a Dialogue-like process can introduce environmental considerations early in the project development process and contribute to the development of a more informed public. These factors improve the overall efficacy of public participation, strengthening the link between project development and environmental assessment in a manner consistent with the original intent of NEPA.

Mon/Fayette Route 51 to Pittsburgh Transportation Project: A Success Story in Integrating Congestion Management System Analysis, Major Investment Study, and National Environmental Policy Act Processes

The 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act placed new emphasis on transportation planning. In response, FHWA and FTA issued Joint Statewide and Metropolitan Planning Regulations (23 C.F.R §450). These regulations call for two studies, the congestion management system (CMS) analysis and the major investment study (MIS), which must be completed to analyze the best use of the existing transportation network and to determine whether and what transportation investments are needed in a metropolitan area. The intent is to use these studies as input to the metropolitan planning organization’s long-range transportation plan. The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (PTC) and the Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission (SPRPC) cooperatively developed and implemented an effective approach to navigate the Mon/Fayette Route 51 to Pittsburgh transportation project through a collaborative process integrating the CMS analysis and MIS. This approach also met the requirements of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation’s (PennDOT’s) Preliminary Alternatives Analysis, one in a series of studies required under PennDOT’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing guidelines. PTC’s goal to advance a preferred major investment alternative into the next phase of project development was accomplished when SPRPC endorsed the integrated CMS analysis/MIS and preliminary alternatives analysis report. Presented is a success story in the effort to integrate the metropolitan planning and NEPA processes at the project programming level. It is hoped that the planning and NEPA principles applied can serve as a model to advance other transportation projects.

Reconciling Transportation Corridor Preservation and National Environmental Policy Act Process: Evaluation of North Carolina Phased Environmental Approach

In recent years, transportation agencies have become increasingly interested in using corridor preservation to protect future highway locations from development. However, the preparation of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents in the late stages of the transportation planning process makes uses of these measures difficult. In an attempt to make the corridor preservation and NEPA processes more compatible, the North Carolina Department of Transportation and FHWA have developed the phased environmental approach, an environmental review process that allows early selection of highway location and makes the use of protection techniques feasible and effective. Although the phased approach has been used in several pilot projects and is intended to become a part of the state’s standard planning process, the procedure’s compliance with the requirements of NEPA has not been evaluated. The compliance of the phased environmental approach with NEPA is examined. Several disparities are identified that place the new procedure in violation of the statute. Considering these problems, three options for modifying the phased approach to provide for compliance with NEPA are identified. These options are compared on the basis of their capacity to provide those benefits offered by the phased approach. A tiered environmental impact statement (EIS) is determined to be the best alternative to the phased environmental approach. This option provides the same benefits as the phased approach while remaining consistent with NEPA. Although several potential problems have been cited regarding the practicality of using a tiered EIS in transportation projects, these concerns may not apply in many cases.

The Social Organization of Risk: Public Involvement in Federal Environmental Planning

This paper describes how the social construction of risk has been institution alized by two U. S. Federal environmental programs. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund), and related regulations require public involvement in determining impacts, iden tifying threats and deciding on remedial environmental actions. Federal environmental planning is oriented towards allowing forums for airing pub lic concerns, without direct public control of decisions. The paper uses the sociology of risk literature to show how the actors and processes have been structured through law and regulation. Following Stallings's (1990) frame work of the social organization of risk discourse, this paper identifies the claims makers, stakeholders, and risk definers within the NEPA and CERCLA processes. The processes include definition soliciting, information dissemi nation, claims making and risk defining. The paper concludes by stressing the need for public involvement policy to be grounded theory and research.

Viewpoint: Integrating CRM (Coordinated Resource Management) and NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) Processes

Coordinated Resource Management (CRM) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) each provide an approach for involving the public and resource specialists from many disciplines in public land management decisions. This viewpoint suggests combining the consensus building approach of CRM into the broader public involvement and sometimes more thorough analysis of a NEPA process. The combined process seems most applicable when a diversity of interests want potentially incompatible decisions, especially if those decisions could significantly affect the structure and function of ecosystems or natural-resource-based economies. Fourteen steps in a combined process describe the mechanics and rationale for this integration. To succeed with this process, begin with thorough preparation, then foster open and repeated 2-way communication. Communication with the broader public ensures that all affected interests may contribute ideas. Consensus building with representatives of all resource interests and land ownerships ensures public trust and broadly supported management. Consensus building continues through decision making, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and replanning.