Comment here on eradication of NEPA

[elkduds]

Federal Register :: Request Access

 

[SAJ-99]

I have sent my comment, but hard to think it will matter. The Almightly himself could come down from above and submit a comment and it wouldn't matter.

 

[Sytes]

Federal Register :: Request Access

Good one to share. People who don't share a comment with a gov request for comments, yet ramble here present their true selves.

Thanks

 

[nrpate05]

Is this real? A proposed rule to eradicate NEPA??

 

[mtlilguy]

It's not the "eradication of NEPA". This rule removes regulations issued specifically by CEQ. Agencies still have their own regulations and policies for performing environmental reviews that keep them in compliance with NEPA. The requirement to perform environmental reviews of federal actions in accordance with NEPA is still in place.

 

[Hunting Wife]

It's not the "eradication of NEPA". This rule removes regulations issued specifically by CEQ. Agencies still have their own regulations and policies for performing environmental reviews that keep them in compliance with NEPA. The requirement to perform environmental reviews of federal actions in accordance with NEPA is still in place.

Correct. It does nothing to NEPA itself. Since the Supreme Court ruled that CEQ has no authority to create rules, it leaves rule making to the agencies. So this action essentially just removes those parts of the CFR that CEQ wasn’t authorized to make. The agencies are able to, and likely will, adopt those existing rules anyway, at least in the short term for continuity’s sake.

 

[Rack Daniels]

Lots of acronyms…….

 

[RealMuddyboots]

Just think of EPA, NEPA, CEQ as layers on an onion. How much onion do you need to make onion rings?

Retired after 38yrs in environmental field and there is no doubt there are layers of bureacracy that can be peeled away to "streamline" the permitting process.

Environmental Assessments (Environmental Impact Statements, Environmental Phase I, II Assessments) will never go away nor should they. This is where the proverbial rubber meets the road. Get the data and act upon it. Get rid of impediments that have zero bearing on the issue at hand. Data is black and white, politics aside.

The real problem with bureacracy is nobody in a government position feels empowered to make a decision being fearful of consequences. And there those in government positions who are not capable of making a decision so stuff "has" to be pushed up to the highest level who has the "authority" to do so. Even then, OMG! Which way is the wind blowing!

I worked for 2 different global companies that if you didn't make a decision even sometimes outside your so called level of authority, your upward movement likely stymied.

This does not exist anywhere in bureacracy. The process needs to provide the decision for the decision makers or else it gets stonewalled.

Oh hell, I need another coffee.

 

[Bonasababy]

Just think of EPA, NEPA, CEQ as layers on an onion. How much onion do you need to make onion rings?

Retired after 38yrs in environmental field and there is no doubt there are layers of bureacracy that can be peeled away to "streamline" the permitting process.

Environmental Assessments (Environmental Impact Statements, Environmental Phase I, II Assessments) will never go away nor should they. This is where the proverbial rubber meets the road. Get the data and act upon it. Get rid of impediments that have zero bearing on the issue at hand. Data is black and white, politics aside.

The real problem with bureacracy is nobody in a government position feels empowered to make a decision being fearful of consequences. And there those in government positions who are not capable of making a decision so stuff "has" to be pushed up to the highest level who has the "authority" to do so. Even then, OMG! Which way is the wind blowing!

I worked for 2 different global companies that if you didn't make a decision even sometimes outside your so called level of authority, your upward movement likely stymied.

This does not exist anywhere in bureacracy. The process needs to provide the decision for the decision makers or else it gets stonewalled.

Oh hell, I need another coffee.

Have seen large projects killed most every time when shortcuts around or attempts to eliminate impact assessments have been taken. Yet the people who want zero review never get that it can actually help them get their project approved.

Heard directly from the agency I am most familiar with that we should expect no decision or directions/clarity in writing anytime soon.

That's great because they have been totally paralyzed in decisions and unable to provide direction even on simple things for some years now.

 

[nrpate05]

In the near future, there may not be any federal employees left to make any decisions...

 

[Straight Arrow]

In the near future, there may not be any federal employees left to make any decisions...

Ergo; the Deep State of Chaos for public safety and services.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

Just think of EPA, NEPA, CEQ as layers on an onion. How much onion do you need to make onion rings?

Retired after 38yrs in environmental field and there is no doubt there are layers of bureacracy that can be peeled away to "streamline" the permitting process.

Environmental Assessments (Environmental Impact Statements, Environmental Phase I, II Assessments) will never go away nor should they. This is where the proverbial rubber meets the road. Get the data and act upon it. Get rid of impediments that have zero bearing on the issue at hand. Data is black and white, politics aside.

The real problem with bureacracy is nobody in a government position feels empowered to make a decision being fearful of consequences. And there those in government positions who are not capable of making a decision so stuff "has" to be pushed up to the highest level who has the "authority" to do so. Even then, OMG! Which way is the wind blowing!

I worked for 2 different global companies that if you didn't make a decision even sometimes outside your so called level of authority, your upward movement likely stymied.

This does not exist anywhere in bureacracy. The process needs to provide the decision for the decision makers or else it gets stonewalled.

Oh hell, I need another coffee.

It happens all the time in some agencies.

I agree with the first part of your post.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

In the near future, there may not be any federal employees left to make any decisions...

This is what some people want. Career civil servants are a problem for those who want to break the rules. Civil servants have to be completely transparent (like no private company in history) and swear an oath to defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. They also have to complete ethics training at least once/year and often more and finally, they can't be bought with lavish bonuses or "work trips" to Cozumel on the company dime.

Transparency, honesty and accountability is not convenient if your goal is to circumvent laws and maximize profits.

 

[BrentD]

This is what some people want. Career civil servants are a problem for those who want to break the rules. Civil servants have to be completely transparent (like no private company in history) and swear to an oath to defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. They also have to complete ethics training at least once/year and often more and finally, they can't be bought with lavish bonuses or "work trips" to Cozumel on the company dime.

Transparency, honesty and accountability is not convenient if your goal is to circumvent laws and maximize profits.

You have that right.

 

[RealMuddyboots]

Both global companies I worked for required annual ethics training with sign off, compliance was not an optional discussion, gifts of any sort must be approved and the monetary limit was basically Walmart brand. Bic ball point maybe. I was offered a 3 day package at the Indy 500, including attending the preceding Ball and pit ticket for some work I did to change a software that we used by the software provider. So for grins, I filled out the paperwork and scheduled a meeting with my dept head who was also attorney. So I went into his office with coffee, sat down and gave him the application. As he is reading it I am trying desperately not to laugh. He gets to the end and starts to admonish and now I am laughing. He got it fast and said if he approved both of us would be fired! Into the shredder it went. And no I did not go, not even a remote thought to do so. And I did have to file report that offer was received and declined. In reputable companies, ethics and compliance are really big part of their Social Responsibilities.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I'm sure there are examples of both in the private sector. But that's the whole point. That there are examples of both. And that's the difference.