NEPA
A Way Forward?
Reducing the Number of Decisions Could Accelerate Fire Management
This is the third of a series of three posts on how to do more to reduce fire risks on federal lands. The first post is here, the second post is here. In addressing the increasing risks of wildfire, we certainly need to scale up the resources we apply to the problem, doing more prescribed …
Continue reading “A Way Forward?”
CONTINUE READINGFire and Permitting Reform
Addressing the difficult parts, regulation and litigation
This is the second of three posts on proposed legislation to address the fire crisis on federal lands (the first post is here). Last post, I talked about why this legislation is essential, and the strengths of the bill that the House passed last Congress. In this post, I’ll talk about the parts of the …
Continue reading “Fire and Permitting Reform”
CONTINUE READINGThe Urgent Need to Address Fire Risk
We need legislative action to accelerate fire risk reduction in general
The Manchin-Barrasso energy permitting bill that I’ve posted about is not the only permitting reform bill that died with the last Congress. The House had passed the “Fix Our Forests Act,” legislation sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman, a Republican from Arkansas, with a focus on trying to reduce fire risks on federal (and other) lands. …
Continue reading “The Urgent Need to Address Fire Risk”
CONTINUE READINGThe Fires in Los Angeles
Wildfire policy and the tragic fires in Southern California?
National attention is (rightly) focused on the terrible fire situation in Los Angeles. At the moment, the top priority is supporting first responders who are trying to control the fires, prevent more damage, and help the people who have lost homes and loved ones. There is (of course) a bunch of chatter on social media …
Continue reading “The Fires in Los Angeles”
CONTINUE READINGTowards Better Permitting Reform
What are we trying to achieve?
This is the third in a series of posts on permitting reform. The first post is here. The second post is here. How could we realistically achieve permitting reform that will advance climate and environmental goals? Answering that question requires recognizing the political realities of a sharply divided Congress and country. Any significant change to …
Continue reading “Towards Better Permitting Reform”
CONTINUE READINGNEPA in the Supreme Court: The Seven Counties Oral Argument
Some arguments surfaced in the discussion that the Court would do well to ignore.
Several arguments popped up in the Supreme Court’s discussion of a major NEPA case that appealed to at least some of the Justices. We think that they would do well to rethink them. Each of the arguments distracts attention from what ought to be the key question: what impacts should the agency take into account in making its decision? We hope, when it comes time to draft opinions, the Justices will think through the arguments a little more fully and head in a different direction.
CONTINUE READINGNEPA in the Supreme Court — On the Eve of Oral Argument
Some thoughts about how the Court should define some limits on indirect effects.
Our paper on the proper scope of NEPA places heavy emphasis on foreseeability, but in an expanded version of the paper we consider some unusual situations where additional factors come into play. This additional analysis makes clear important limits on NEPA scope that we think address at least some of the concerns that have (appropriately) been raised about ever-expanding NEPA review and the risk that it will hamper efforts to develop needed infrastructure.
CONTINUE READINGNEPA and Loper Deference (Part II)
Guest contributor Justin Pidot outlines what losing CEQ’s NEPA authority means for interagency coordination and efficiency.
Dan provided a terrific overview of the legal issues involved in the D.C. Circuit’s recent decision holding that CEQ lacks authority to promulgate regulations and, therefore, that the regulations governing implementation of NEPA across the government for decades are ultra vires. I want to offer some additional observations focused on the potential practical implications. First, …
Continue reading “NEPA and Loper Deference (Part II)”
CONTINUE READINGNEPA and Loper Deference
The CEQ regulations will continue to receive deference. The question is how much.
The Supreme Court already has a NEPA case on its docket for next year. That should give the Court the chance to clarify Loper as well as the scope of CEQ’s authority.
CONTINUE READINGNEPA in the Supreme Court (Part IV)
Understanding how causation applies for NEPA reviews.
This functional approach is consistent with Supreme Court precedent, based on the text and purposes of NEPA, and provides workable guidelines for agencies to determine what kinds of effects to examine when conducting environmental reviews. It is the approach the Court should follow when deciding Seven Counties, and when giving guidance to lower courts and agencies about how to apply NEPA.
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
