The statute that ultimately addressed these needs was the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347). Signed into law by President Nixon on January 1, 1970, NEPA was the first of several major environmental laws passed in the 1970s. It declared a national policy to protect the environment. The act also created the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the Executive Office of the President. Most agencies use NEPA as an umbrella statute—that is, a framework to coordinate or demonstrate compliance with any studies, reviews, or consultations required by any other environmental laws. The use of NEPA in this capacity can lead to confusion. The need to comply with another environmental law, such as the Clean Water Act or Endangered Species Act, may be identified within the framework of the NEPA process, but NEPA itself is not the source of the obligation. This report provides information about NEPA's background and legislative history, provisions of the law, the role of the courts and CEQ in its implementation, how agencies implement NEPA's requirements, how the public is involved in the NEPA process, the means by which NEPA is used as an umbrella statute to coordinate or demonstrate compliance with other environmental requirements, and claims by some stakeholders that NEPA causes delays in some federal actions. NEPA and Its History

In the 1950s and 1960s, Congress began to react to increasing public concern about the environment. In the congressional debates that ensued, a key legislative option considered was the declaration of a national environmental policy. Advocates of a national policy argued that without a specific environmental policy, federal agencies were neither able nor inclined to consider the environmental impacts of their actions in fulfilling the agency's mission. The detailed statement would later be referred to as an environmental impact statement (EIS). With an initial absence of regulations specifying implementation procedures and no agency authorized to enforce its requirements, federal agencies have reacted in different ways to NEPA's requirements. Some initially had difficulty complying with NEPA. As a result, litigation to enforce agency compliance with NEPA's mandate began almost immediately. In addition to questions of procedure (e.g., how, when, or why an EIS must be prepared), another question ultimately to be determined was how the environmental policy goals of the act should be implemented or enforced. For example, the regulations
required agencies to include a project-"scoping" process to identify important environmental issues and related review requirements before writing the EIS; required EISs to be prepared in multiple stages (draft and final), with supplemental EISs required under specific circumstances; provided criteria for determining the significance of impacts and what constituted a "major federal action"; defined and specified the roles of "lead agencies" (those responsible for preparing the NEPA documentation) and "cooperating agencies" (agencies that participate in or contribute to the preparation of the NEPA documentation); allowed lead agencies to set time limits on milestones in the NEPA process and page limits on documentation; specified a dispute resolution process between lead agencies and EPA (required originally under § 309 of the Clean Air Act), if EPA determined the EIS to be "unsatisfactory"; specified environmental review procedures and documents applicable to projects that had uncertain or insignificant environmental impacts; specified how an agency was to involve the public in the NEPA process; required, for actions involving an EIS, that a public record of decision be published when a final agency decision is made; and provided for alternative compliance procedures in the event of an emergency. Theoretically, if the requirement to comply with NEPA were removed, compliance with each applicable law would still be required.
Beginning in the late 1950s and through the 1960s, Congress reacted to increasing public concern about the impact that human activity could have on the environment. A key legislative option to address this concern was the declaration of a national environmental policy. Advocates of this approach argued that without a specific policy, federal agencies were neither able nor inclined to consider the environmental impacts of their actions in fulfilling the agency's mission. The statute that ultimately addressed this issue was the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347).
Signed into law by President Nixon on January 1, 1970, NEPA was the first of several major environmental laws passed in the 1970s. It declared a national policy to protect the environment and created a Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the Executive Office of the President. To implement the national policy, NEPA required that a detailed statement of environmental impacts be prepared for all major federal actions significantly affecting the environment. The "detailed statement" would ultimately be referred to as an environmental impact statement (EIS).
With an initial absence of regulations specifying implementation procedures and no agency authorized to enforce the law, federal agencies reacted in different ways to NEPA's requirements. Some had difficulty complying with the law's EIS requirements. As a result, litigation that served to interpret NEPA's requirements and enforce agency compliance began almost immediately. In addition to questions of procedure (e.g., how, when, or why an EIS must be prepared), another question was how the environmental policy goals of the act should be implemented or enforced. The courts ultimately decided that NEPA is a procedural statute with twin aims requiring agencies to (1) consider the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and (2) inform the public that they (the agencies) considered environmental concerns in their decision-making process. In that capacity, NEPA has become a primary mechanism for public participation in the federal decision-making process.
As it has been implemented, most agencies use NEPA as an "umbrella" statute. As such, NEPA forms a framework to coordinate or demonstrate compliance with any study, review, or consultation required by other environmental laws. The use of NEPA in this capacity can lead to confusion. The need to comply with another environmental law, such as the Clean Water Act, may be identified within the framework of the NEPA process, but NEPA itself is not the source of the obligation. Theoretically, if the requirement to comply with NEPA were removed, compliance with each applicable law would still be required.