Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions rule (2022)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


The National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions rule is a significant rule issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) effective May 20, 2022, that amended regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 to restore them to 1978 standards. CEQ issued the rule pursuant to its authority under NEPA.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Name: National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions
  • Code of Federal Regulations: 40 CFR 1502, 1507, and 1508
  • Agency: Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
  • Action: Final rule
  • Type of significant rule: Other significant rule

    • Timeline

    The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

    • May 20, 2022: The final rule took effect.[1]
    • April 20, 2022: CEQ issued the final rule.[1]
    • October 21, 2021: CEQ hosted a listening session regarding the proposed rule.[1]
    • October 19, 2021: CEQ hosted a listening session regarding the proposed rule.[1]
    • November 22, 2021: The comment period closed.[1]
    • October 7, 2021: CEQ issued the proposed rule and opened the comment period.[1]
    • January 20, 2021: President Joe Biden (D) issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13990, Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis, which directed CEQ to review regulations made by former-President Donald Trump (R) under E.O. 13807, Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects, issued in August 2017.[1]

    Background

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the Executive Office of the President and commissioned federal agencies to "give appropriate consideration to environmental values in their decision making," according to the text of the National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions rule. Per a 1977 Executive Order (E.O.) by former President Jimmy Carter (D), CEQ created NEPA regulations that guided federal agencies in implementing NEPA. CEQ believed regulations were comprehensive, according to the rule, and kept them largely unchanged for 40 years. Former President Donald Trump (R) issued an E.O. in 2017 that directed CEQ, in cooperation with other agencies, to amend the 1978 NEPA regulations. After his 2021 election, President Joe Biden (D) repealed the 2017 E.O. that amended NEPA regulations. This rule restored many of the 1978 NEPA regulations, among other provisions.[1]

    Summary of the rule

    The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:

    “ The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issues this final rule to amend certain provisions of its regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), addressing the purpose and need of a proposed action, agency NEPA procedures for implementing CEQ's NEPA regulations, and the definition of 'effects.' The amendments generally restore provisions that were in effect for decades before being modified in 2020.[1][2] ”

    Summary of provisions

    The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “ CEQ is issuing this final rule to amend three provisions of its regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., which are set forth in 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508 ('NEPA regulations' or 'CEQ regulations'). First, CEQ is revising 40 CFR 1502.13 on the requirement for a purpose and need statement in an environmental impact statement. The revision clarifies that agencies have discretion to consider a variety of factors when assessing an application for an authorization, removing the requirement that an agency base the purpose and need on the goals of an applicant and the agency's statutory authority. The final rule also makes a conforming edit to the definition of 'reasonable alternatives' in 40 CFR 1508.1(z). Second, CEQ is revising 40 CFR 1507.3 to remove language that could be construed to limit agencies' flexibility to develop or revise procedures to implement NEPA specific to their programs and functions that may go beyond the CEQ regulatory requirements. Third, CEQ is revising the definition of 'effects' in paragraph (g) of 40 CFR 1508.1 to include direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. CEQ is making these changes in order to better align the provisions with CEQ's extensive experience implementing NEPA and unique perspective on how NEPA can best inform agency decision making, as well as longstanding Federal agency experience and practice, NEPA's statutory text and purpose to protect and enhance the quality of the human environment, including making decisions informed by science, and case law interpreting NEPA's requirements.[2] ”

    Significant impact

    See also: Significant regulatory action

    Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.

    Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic impact of $100 million or more. Executive Order 14094, issued by President Joe Biden (D) on April 6, 2023, made changes to Executive Order 12866, including referring to economically significant rules as section 3(f)(1) significant rules and raising the monetary threshold for economic significance to $200 million or more.[1]


    The text of the National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions rule states that OMB deemed this rule significant, but not economically significant:

    “

    Because this final rule applies to all Federal agencies, it is a significant regulatory action that CEQ submitted to OMB for review.

    ...

    CEQ hereby certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.[2]

    		”

    Text of the rule

    The full text of the rule is available below:[1]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 Federal Register, "National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions," January 23, 2024.
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=National_Environmental_Policy_Act_Implementing_Regulations_Revisions_rule_(2022)&oldid=10360969"