EPA has proposed what it describes as “minor changes” to its procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act, the law that requires agencies to consider the environmental actions of projects and permits.
Many of the proposal’s changes are meant to comply with laws passed in 2023 and 2025 amending NEPA amid complaints from Republicans and some Democrats that environmental reviews have been increasing the expense and time of new projects.
The proposal also makes changes related to a Supreme Court ruling last year limiting NEPA’s impact, as well as executive orders from President Donald Trump targeting the consideration of environmental justice, the effort to alleviate pollution that takes a disproportionately heavy toll on communities of color and low-income and rural areas.
“Our new reforms, if finalized, would set hard deadlines, cut the red tape, and let America build more, and we’re doing it without weakening a single environmental protection,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement. “Faster, smarter, and cleaner is exactly how government should work for the American people.”
Much of EPA’s work is exempt from NEPA review, including all Clean Air Act permits and regulations and most work under the Clean Water Act, except for wastewater treatment construction grants and point-source permits.
But the agency reviews environmental impact statements prepared by other federal agencies when permitting major energy, transportation and infrastructure projects.
Many of the changes in the proposal, to be published in Thursday’s Federal Register, are to comply with new NEPA requirements laid out in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
That includes requiring environmental impact statements — the highest level of review under NEPA — be completed within two years and be 150 pages or less. In recent years, final EISs took an average of 2.8 years to complete while clocking in at an average of 661 pages, according to CEQ reviews.
“Shorter environmental documents could facilitate more timely reviews by decisionmakers and the public,” EPA said. “As a result, projects may be completed earlier.”
Other FRA-mandated changes include clarifying how to determine whether to prepare an environmental document, setting duties for “lead agencies” versus “cooperating agencies,” setting how long EPA can rely on programmatic environmental reviews, and establishing how to adopt other agencies’ categorical exclusions.
The proposal also adds a provision from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that created a fee for project sponsors to accelerate their NEPA reviews. The fee amount is determined by CEQ; the proposal asks that project sponsors “consult with EPA before submitting a request to CEQ.”
EPA’s proposal would also limit the scope of NEPA reviews, as the Supreme Court ruled last year.
“According to the Court, when determining the scope of a NEPA review for a proposed action, the agency must consider the proposed action at hand and that proposed action’s reasonably foreseeable environmental effects,” the proposal said. “NEPA generally does not require an agency to analyze environmental effects from other projects that are separate in time and place, that fall outside of the agency’s regulatory authority, or that would have to be initiated by a third party.”
The proposal says it will also “fill in gaps” left when the Council on Environmental Quality’s NEPA implementation rules were ruled by the courts to be non-binding on agencies.
And to comply with an executive order last year that rescinded environmental justice considerations, in several sections of the rules “EPA removes references to specific populations and further clarifies that the EPA considers the impacts of human health and environmental effects on all individuals.”
The proposal (Reg. 2010-AA16) will be open for public comment through July 27.
FERC last week made similar changes to its own NEPA implementation rules.
