APWA Returns to U.S. House Panel to Urge ‘Logical Next Step’ in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Reform

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Washington D.C.—A top official with the world’s largest organization of public works professionals today said Congress must continue to improve the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, by accelerating legal reviews.

“While much of the agency process has been clarified by the previously enacted reforms, the legal process has not,” American Public Works Association Past-President Keith Pugh, PE, PWLF, told the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources, which is considering a resolution on the matter by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Arkansas). “APWA supports this as a logical next step in continuing the progress in streamlining for all infrastructure. A reasonable timeline for judicial review should allow for a more predictable and productive process.”

Without improvements to the legal review process, Pugh, who is also government affairs director for WithersRavenel, NC, said smaller, less-resourced American communities are at risk.

“We see the consequences of underinvestment for people and the environment across the country; from avoiding stormwater and wastewater improvements that could reduce the hazards of flooding and contamination; to stunted transportation systems that are congested, offer few options and limited mobility for travelers, and higher emissions,” Pugh said. “Rather than risk a court battle over the perfect being the enemy of the good, they choose neither.”

Pugh said APWA supports the legislation’s proposals to better define the parameters for review and engagement, including:

• 120 days to pursue litigation, 180 days for a court to reach a decision, allow 60 days for an appeal to be filed and another 180 days for an appellate court to reach a decision
  • Same timeline applies to any litigation concerning a supplemental environmental review
• The definition of “reasonably foreseeable” being in the area directly affected by the major Federal action, directly under the control of the agency, and having a reasonably close causal relationship between a change in the environment and the project
• Sensible limits on undertaking new research unless new research is essential to a reasoned choice among alternatives, and if the overall costs and time frame of obtaining this research are reasonable
• No federal agency shall be required to consider any research after receipt of a completed application, though an agency may consider relevant research made available after a completed application, but not after a final agency action, if the information is peer reviewed and determined to be essential in determining environmental effects, and
• When there is a public comment period, the civil action must be pursued by a participant in the proceedings who submitted a comment during the public comment period and the comment was sufficiently detailed to put the applicable Federal agency on notice of the issue.

“It is our goal to examine and offer a reasonable number of alternatives for projects that are technically and economically feasible,” Pugh said. “Whether it is roads, bridges, emergency management, sanitation or water, we are stewards for our communities and know we can deliver these projects in an efficient manner. It would be a disservice to not incorporate public works in further permitting reform as this would affect many communities’ quality of life and taxpayer resources.”

This is the American Public Works Association’s second appearance before the House Committee on Natural Resources to discuss NEPA reforms.