Origins and development - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 31

Table 2.1 Main points of NEPA

NEPA consists of two titles. Title I establishes a national policy on the protection and restoration of
environmental quality. Title II sets up a three-member Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to
review environmental programmes and progress, and to advise the president on these matters. It
also requires the president to submit an annual “Environmental Quality Report” to Congress. The
provisions of Title I are the main determinants of EIA in the USA, and they are summarized here.

Section 101 contains requirements of a substantive nature. It states that the Federal Government has
a continuing responsibility to “create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can
exist in productive harmony, and fulfil the social, economic and other requirements of present and
future generations of Americans”. As such the government is to use all practicable means,
“consistent with other essential considerations of national policy”, to minimize adverse
environmental impact and to preserve and enhance the environment through federal plans and
programmes. Finally, “each person should enjoy a healthful environment”, and citizens have a
responsibility to preserve the environment.

Section 102 requirements are of a procedural nature. Federal agencies are required to make full
analyses of all the environmental effects of implementing their programmes or actions. Section
102(1) directs agencies to interpret and administer policies, regulations and laws in accordance with
the policies of NEPA. Section 102(2) requires federal agencies
• to use “a systematic and interdisciplinary approach” to ensure that social, natural and

environmental sciences are used in planning and decision-making;

• to identify and develop procedures and methods so that “presently unquantified environmental

amenities and values may be given appropriate consideration in decision-making along with
traditional economic and technical considerations”;

• to “include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major

Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed
statement by the responsible official” on:

• the environmental impact of the proposed action;

• any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be

implemented;

• alternatives to the proposed action;

• the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance

and enhancement of long-term productivity;

• any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the

proposed action should it be implemented (authors' emphases).

Section 103 requires federal agencies to review their regulations and procedures for adherence to
NEPA, and to suggest any necessary remedial measures.

1. Challenging an agency's decision not to prepare an EIA. This generally raised issues
such as whether a project was major, federal, an “action”, or had significant
environmental impacts (see NEPA §102(2)(C)). For instance, the issue of whether an
action is federal came into question in some lawsuits concerning the federal funding of
local government projects. 1