Environmental Reviews: Helpful (and Hurtful) to Many Ideologies

Writing at the Heritage Foundation’s blog, Nick Loris says that the White House’s pending decision on whether to consider climate change in federal environmental reviews amounts to "more green tape."

protected_bike_lane.jpgSan Francisco’s newest bike lanes: made $1 million pricier by environmental reviews. (Photo: Streetsblog SF)

Citing Republican senators’ concerns that existing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements have caused lengthy delays in transportation project planning, Loris writes that adding climate change to NEPA will

guarantee that the billions in infrastructure spending in this stimulus
bill will not be spent till years after the economy has already
recovered. The money that will be spent in the near-term won’t be spent
efficiently; it will be spent overcoming unnecessary regulatory hurdles …

One wonders if Heritage would describe the three-year delay in San Francisco’s planned bike lanes, caused by local bike critic Rob Anderson’s request for a full environmental review, qualifies as an "unnecessary regulatory hurdle." Streetsblog San Francisco reported that the final price tag for the city’s review topped $1 million.

Or how about the opponents of a car-free trial in New York’s Prospect Park, who attempted to delay the project by pushing for an environmental review? Their efforts would hardly meet Heritage’s definition of "green tape" promoted by environmental advocates.

Perhaps Loris would take a different position on the northeast corridor’s failure to secure federal high-speed rail money thanks to the burdensome length of environmental reviews. Since Heritage had previously blasted the entire high-speed rail program as "fiscal waste on the fast track," the group might hail any "regulatory hurdle" that standing in the way of rail expansion.

The moral of the story: NEPA-mandated reviews can be utilized successfully by liberals, conservatives, green groups, highway boosters, and just about every constituency under the sun. That’s an argument for streamlining the environmental review process, not eliminating it.

  • MARIN

    I remember watching the debate on the Recovery Act between Sen. Barrasso and the ever-shrill Sen. Boxer, when Barasso proposed to waive NEPA for Recovery Act projects. Admittedly, he went too far, but i couldnt help but cheer him on. As a big-city transportation agency leader, i’ve had more minor projects held up over environmental reviews than i can shake a stick at. Just before Christmas, we received several pages of comments back on an environmental assessmment — the most substantive of the comments was that we “have met all the requirements, but the table of contents needs to be re-worked”. IT TOOK 4 MONTHS TO GET THOSE COMMENTS OUT OF OUR FEDERAL HIGHWAY DIVISION OFFICE — four months we could have been acquiring right-of-way, doing final design, etc. all of this for a new connector roadway that makes possible a new transit-oriented development.

    Moreover, i’ve not yet met a federal “streamlining” process that doesn’t involve more, rather than less, paperwork.

    There’s nothing wrong with NEPA…its the federal bureaucracy that has run amok in implementing it.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Transport Contractors Urge White House to Revamp Enviro Review Rules

|
The trade group representing private-sector transportation contractors is urging the Obama administration to change the way environmental reviews are conducted for infrastructure projects, proposing to favor "categorical exclusions" (CEs) from federal review rules over the lengthier process of measuring the environmental impact of construction work. Environmental reviews added an estimated $1 million to the cost […]

Will Big Highway Projects Have to Consider Climate Change?

|
Since 1970, the National Environmental Protection Act has required federal agencies to consider the impacts of their projects on air, water, and soil pollution — but not on climate change. Until recently, carbon dioxide, which causes global warning, wasn’t classified as a pollutant and so couldn’t be regulated under environmental laws. The EPA in 2009 […]

Senate Requires Environmental Approval For Stimulus Projects

|
NEPA oversight should prevent the Garden State Parkway from being widened using stimulus funds. The final draft of the Senate’s economic recovery bill will require all projects funded by the stimulus to have approval under the National Environmental Protection Act, or NEPA. Sponsored by Barbara Boxer, the NEPA amendment (full text after the jump) was […]

GOP ‘Streamlining’ Plan Threatens to Clear a Path for Highways and Pollution

|
The summary of the House Transportation Committee’s reauthorization bill – no legislative text has been released yet – includes several provisions for “streamlining” project delivery. While on its face, a little streamlining could help reduce excessive delays and bring costs in line, environmentalists are concerned that underlying the “streamlining” provision is a desire to gut […]

New GOP Bill Would Bar Enviro Reviews from Considering Climate

|
Republicans on the Senate environment committee, who months ago began criticizing the Obama administration for evaluating federally funded infrastructure projects for their impact on climate change, today introduced legislation that would bar the White House from making climate a factor in environmental reviews. Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), one of the new NEPA bill’s sponsors, holds […]