This article presents the findings of an online survey and interviews with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) professionals on their opinion on the essential and most important components of agency NEPA programs. A list of NEPA program components was developed based on a review of books, articles, and papers on ways to improve the NEPA process. Results of the online survey indicate that all of the listed elements are considered important for an agency NEPA program to be successful. No program element was ranked lower than 3 (“somewhat important”). The highest-ranked element (1, “critically important”) was senior management support for the NEPA process. Interviews with senior NEPA specialists confirmed that senior management support for the NEPA process was critical, and that other critical components flowed from that support. Senior managers were interpreted as being the agency’s senior NEPA manager or the senior manager at each facility, installation, or command. Education was most frequently identified as how agency NEPA staff could develop and maintain consistent senior management support for the NEPA process. The interview sample size was small, and further research could be conducted with other agency representatives to identify additional successful methods to develop consistent senior management support for the NEPA process.

Environmental Practice 16: 1–9 (2014)

Many environmental impact analyses, including those pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, do not identify the spatial and temporal scales used in the analysis. Without definition of analytical scales, the reader is left to infer scale, which could confound decision making when different readers infer different scales of analysis. For ecological analysis, site-specific spatial and temporal scales based on unique natural features and phenomena are most appropriate, given the inability of ecological resources to restrict themselves according to political boundaries or arbitrary time lines. Definition of scale in the environmental impact document allows the reader or decision maker to consider the impacts in the intended context. Scales of ecological analysis should be based on ecological principles as applied to a specific study area and the ecological resources that may be affected by the proposed action or activity. The multiscalar concept of biological connectivity should be addressed in spatial and temporal analysis, which inherently includes cross-scale considerations such as those for potential effects on metapopulations. Definition of spatial and temporal scales is critical to bound the impact analysis and to inform readers and decision makers, and suggested guidelines are provided as an example of an acceptable method. Although several different scales could be correctly chosen, analysts should identify and define spatial and temporal scales used to promote consistent interpretations of results and to facilitate the decision-making process.

Environmental Practice 16: 281–286 (2014)

In times of increasing workloads and flat budgets, it is important that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) use available resources and techniques efficiently and effectively to achieve success in environmental reviews throughout the agency. By implementing a contract with Duke University, cosponsored by the Council on Environmental Quality, to present courses near the NRC Headquarters in the Implementation of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the NRC major program offices achieved success in training a large number of staff in NEPA in a timely and cost-effective manner. In addition, this training is positioning NRC staff to complete the Duke University graduate-level professional certificate in NEPA.

Environmental Practice 16: 287–289(2014)

This article analyzes the decision-making processes used by government agencies when trying to decide whether to approve or reject projects that impact the environment. This article examines some of the real-life inputs into the decision, as well as the influences on the decision maker. For example, some academics suggest that decision makers are more influenced by the environmental impact assessment process itself than by the conclusions of the assessment. Three case studies are presented. I provide an overview of each project and the various influences on the respective decision maker. I demonstrate that decision makers tend to elevate social, cultural, and political concerns over the natural environment. I also demonstrate that each decision maker was influenced by a particular social, cultural, or political aspect unique to each situation. I recommend further research in the expanding use of analytical tools and models in environmental decision making. These tools may encourage the decision maker to give more consideration to the results of the environmental impact assessment versus other external influences.

Environmental Practice 16: 290–301 (2014)

The article offers an examination of recent efforts to streamline the NEPA process. Proposed streamlining methods are evaluated to answer whether streamlining initiatives would either improve NEPA or result in a cautionary tale of unintended consequences. Examples are given of commonly encountered sources of delay outside of NEPA that streamlining initiatives cannot address. The article concludes with a discussion of ways to reduce delay in NEPA review.

Environmental Practice 16: 302–308 (2014)

The smallest possible National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document is one that cannot be made more streamlined. A NEPA document could not be more streamlined than to present eight elements of essential information as outlined in this article. Neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement would include a distinct, separate no-action alternative. Instead, today’s situation would be extended to the same point in the future, for purposes of comparison, as are the action alternatives. NEPA documents for projects would not develop alternatives to the proposal. Instead, NEPA documents would only develop alternatives that accomplish the same thing as intended by the proposed alternative. An environmental assessment would have no alternatives except for mitigating actions not already included in the proposed action. NEPA documents would not include exhaustive lists of possible environmental and other social and cultural consequences. Instead, relevance would determine which of these aspects are analyzed and compared (though under current NEPA regulations it seems that relevance determinations should be included in NEPA documents). Ultimate streamlining uses plain language. It meets all minimum legal requirements. It takes the fewest pages and should take the least time. It is the least amount of work that can produce the desired outcome.

Environmental Practice 16: 309–315 (2014)

Programmatic analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are broadly scoped for assessing the environmental impacts of federal actions across a span of conditions, such as facilities, geographic regions, or multiproject programs. Programmatic NEPA analysis can be an excellent decision-making tool that facilitates proactive and strategic considerations of environmental and other important criteria ahead of the need for site-specific or project-level action. Employing a programmatic approach can lead to more informed decision making and to streamlined processes for individual actions. This article showcases examples of effective programmatic NEPA analysis and explores the use of programmatic NEPA analysis as a tool for strategic analysis and decision making.

Environmental Practice 16: 316–322 (2014)

Precisely what is the relationship between the developing jurisprudence of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the most renowned “baby” NEPA? What is the societal and environmental value of the current legal structure of these two statutory behemoths both individually and conjunctionally considered? Endeavoring to answer these questions, this study analyzes all published opinions from the First, Ninth, and Eleventh United States Circuit Courts of Appeals during a fifteen year study period (1997 to 2012), where plaintiffs challenged the validity of a federal agency’s compliance with NEPA. It reveals not only that CEQA jurisprudence has strayed from that of NEPA, despite being modeled after it, but, even more astounding, that NEPA jurisprudence of the Ninth Circuit, the federal appellate court that includes California, is following CEQA’s blatant divergence from NEPA as practiced in the rest of the country, creating a fundamentally different version of NEPA applicable only to the Western states. The study concludes by calling on the Council on Environmental Quality to update its NEPA regulations to provide a more clear explanation of the statute’s mandates, including clear direction on how federal agencies should accomplish these mandates.

Environmental Practice 16: 329–334 (2014)

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) statute and regulations require that documents should be prepared for a wide range of readers. These readers have markedly different and sometimes contradictory information needs and expectations. The process of developing NEPA documents supports good intra-agency and interagency communication but produces lengthy technical documents that are difficult for the general public to understand.

Environmental Practice 16: 1–6 (2014)

Environmental Practice 16: 1–2 (2014)