The Trump Administration Is Attacking the Science in the National Environmental Policy Act

The Importance of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) Under NEPA

Every disaster movie starts with someone not listening to a scientist. In the Norwegian movie, The Wave, a computer screen clearly shows two sinking bars on a data chart, an alarm is sounding, and the scientist who has studied and understands these alarms warns their manager—and everyone in the town—and yet is told not to worry.

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) serve as that data chart, so to speak, to inform whether an alarm should sound.

NEPA was signed into law in 1970 by President Nixon and was the first major US environmental law that requires, directs, and guides these assessments. NEPA requires that before developers start an activity—like building a highway, mine, or a power plant—there must be analysis and a public process. The law calls on the federal government to help ensure that each generation functions as a “trustee of the environment for future generations.”

Government agencies conduct EIA to determine the extent of environmental damages that may occur should a project move forward under a few different scenarios (called alternatives). Scholars have described the aim of EIA as enhanced consideration of environmental objectives to produce a more sustainable form of development. In other words: they aim to determine if environmental quality will decrease as a result of the project. Over 100 countries worldwide have adopted some form of EIA.

The Threats to NEPA and EIA

The Trump administration is currently making significant changes that weaken NEPA and its implementation of EIA. For example, they are reducing the time frame for agencies to gather evidence from one year to 14 days. They are also repealing regulations used to guide EIA by the White House Council on Environmental Quality, directing federal agencies to prioritize efficiency over comprehensiveness and precaution, and eliminating analyses of environmental justice and cumulative effects. Protecting and improving NEPA is crucial to ensure better projects and environmental outcomes in the future.

The Role of Science in NEPA

NEPA is fundamentally rooted in using science to inform and correct policymaking. The law explicitly mentions the integration of natural and social sciences in the environmental assessment process. It requires a systematic, interdisciplinary approach and mandates scientific integrity in the analysis. The White House Council on Environmental Quality plays a vital role in enforcing the rules established under NEPA and ensuring consideration of various scientific, economic, social, esthetic, and cultural aspects.

Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) are a key component of the EIA process, providing detailed analyses of the potential impacts of proposed projects on the environment. These statements include assessments of endangered species, air and water quality, historic and cultural sites, and social and economic impacts. They also incorporate a cumulative effects analysis to evaluate the combined impact of the proposed project with other past, present, and future actions.

The Importance of Public Participation

Public participation is a crucial aspect of the EIA process, allowing for transparency and accountability in decision-making. NEPA reports, such as EIS, are made available to the public for comments and feedback. Government agencies also engage in formal consultation with Tribal entities when Indigenous lands and resources may be affected by proposed projects.

Science communication strategies are employed to enhance public understanding of the technical analyses and potential impacts outlined in EIS. These strategies include visual aids, written summaries, and stakeholder perspectives to ensure a comprehensive and inclusive review process.

Conclusion

NEPA and EIA play a vital role in ensuring sustainable development and environmental protection. It is essential to uphold the integrity of these processes and protect them from weakening policies that undermine their effectiveness. By valuing science, public engagement, and thorough analysis, we can make informed decisions that benefit both current and future generations.