What GAO Found
Governmentwide data on the number and type of most National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA) analyses are not readily available, as data collection efforts vary by agency. NEPA generally requires federal agencies to evaluate the potential environmental effects of actions they propose to carry out, fund, or approve (e.g., by permit) by preparing analyses of different comprehensiveness depending on the significance of a proposed project’s effects on the environment— from the most detailed Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) to the less comprehensive Environmental Assessments (EA) and Categorical Exclusions (CE). Agencies do not routinely track the number of EAs or CEs, but the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)—the entity within the Executive Office of the President that oversees NEPA implementation—estimates that about 95 percent of NEPA analyses are CEs, less than 5 percent are EAs, and less than 1 percent are EISs.
Projects requiring an EIS are a small portion of all projects but are likely to be high-profile, complex, and expensive. The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) maintains governmentwide information on EISs.
A 2011 Congressional Research Service report noted that determining the total number of federal actions subject to NEPA is difficult, since most agencies track only the number of actions requiring an EIS. Little information exists on the costs and benefits of completing NEPA analyses.
Agencies do not routinely track the cost of completing NEPA analyses, and there is no governmentwide mechanism to do so , according to officials from CEQ, EPA, and other agencies GAO reviewed.
However, the Department of Energy (DOE) tracks limited cost data associated with NEPA analyses. DOE officials told GAO that they track the money the agency pays to contractors to conduct NEPA analyses. According to DOE data, its median EIS contractor cost for calendar years 2003 through 2012
was $1.4 million . For context, a 2003 task force report to CEQ—the only available source of governmentwide cost estimates—estimated that a typical
EIS cost from $250,000 to $2 million. EAs and CEs generally cost less than EISs, according to CEQ and federal agencies.
Information on the benefits of completing NEPA analyses is largely qualitative. According to studies and agency officials, some of the qualitative benefits of NEPA include its role in encouraging public participation and in discovering and addressing project design problems that could be more costly in the long run. Complicating the determination of costs and benefits, agency activities under NEPA are hard to separate from other required environmental analyses under federal laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act; executive orders; agency guidance; and state and local laws. Some information is available on the frequency and outcome of NEPA litigation.
Agency data, interviews with agency officials, and available studies show that most NEPA analyses do not result in litigation, although the impact of litigation could be substantial if a single law suit affects numerous federal decisions or actions in several states
In 2011, the most recent data available, CEQ reported 94 NEPA cases filed, down from the average of 129 cases filed per year from calendar year 2001
through calendar year 2008. The federal government prevails in most NEPA litigation, according to CEQ and legal studies.
To read the full GAO report as pdf.... http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/662543.pdf