Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
NYT: Trump Moves to Exempt Big Projects From Environmental Review
New York Times Jan. 9, 2020, 9:02 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON — The White House on Thursday will introduce the first major changes to the nation’s benchmark environmental protection law in more than three decades, moving to ease approval of pipelines and other major energy and infrastructure projects without detailed environmental review.
Many of the changes to the law — the 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act, a landmark measure that touches nearly every significant construction project in the country — have been long sought by the oil and gas industry, whose members applauded the move and called it long overdue.
White House officials on Thursday morning declined to comment on the proposed regulations, which will be formally released later in the day. One person familiar with the announcement said the administration would highlight a replacement of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge in North Carolina, which took more than 20 years because of federal reviews. Administration officials will argue that the changes will help projects like that one move faster.
Under the law, major federal projects like bridges, highways, pipelines or power plants that will have a significant impact on the environment require a review, or environmental impact statement, outlining potential consequences. The proposed new rules, which guide the way the law is implemented, will narrow the range of projects that demand such a review. It will do that by creating a new category of “non-major” federal actions that can move forward without any assessment, according to two government officials familiar with the regulation.
Many of the changes to the law — the 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act, a landmark measure that touches nearly every significant construction project in the country — have been long sought by the oil and gas industry, whose members applauded the move and called it long overdue.
White House officials on Thursday morning declined to comment on the proposed regulations, which will be formally released later in the day. One person familiar with the announcement said the administration would highlight a replacement of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge in North Carolina, which took more than 20 years because of federal reviews. Administration officials will argue that the changes will help projects like that one move faster.
Under the law, major federal projects like bridges, highways, pipelines or power plants that will have a significant impact on the environment require a review, or environmental impact statement, outlining potential consequences. The proposed new rules, which guide the way the law is implemented, will narrow the range of projects that demand such a review. It will do that by creating a new category of “non-major” federal actions that can move forward without any assessment, according to two government officials familiar with the regulation.
snip
The proposal will not mention the words “climate change” but will say that agencies no longer must consider the “cumulative” consequences of new infrastructure. Courts have interpreted that requirement as a mandate to study the effects of allowing more planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. It also has meant understanding the impacts of rising sea levels and other results of climate change on a given project.
That means agencies will not have to examine whether a pipeline, mine or other fossil fuel project would worsen climate change. It also means there will not be any requirement to understand how or whether a road or bridge in a coastal area would be threatened by sea-level rise.
That means agencies will not have to examine whether a pipeline, mine or other fossil fuel project would worsen climate change. It also means there will not be any requirement to understand how or whether a road or bridge in a coastal area would be threatened by sea-level rise.
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/climate/trump-nepa-environment.html
The NYT pay wall seems very strict this morning. The gist is here in the excerpt.
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
