For over half a century, companies that need federal permits, licenses, and approvals for construction and development projects have had to contend with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies to conduct a detailed environmental review before undertaking a major federal action (like permitting, granting a right-of-way, or holding a lease sale for offshore projects) that could have a significant effect on the environment. NEPA reviews can hold up projects for months or even years, and—even after they are completed—NEPA can delay or even block a project because NEPA offers an avenue for a project’s opponents to sue, alleging that the project has to be stopped because the NEPA review was not sufficient. Moreover, while NEPA does not compel an agency to take any particular action based on the results of an environmental review, a finding of a major adverse environmental effect often triggers still more review, and agencies frequently elect to mitigate the identified effects, by—for example—reducing the scope of a permit or imposing conditions on a project.
Click here to read the full insight: "Supreme Court’s Seven County Decision Smooths the Way for Major Building Projects Requiring Federal Approvals."
