05/10/05 N.E.P.A. reform?, Part One

05/10/05 N.E.P.A. reform?, Part One

Before there was the Endangered Species Act, before there was the Clean Water Act, there was the National Environmental Policy Act. MCMORRIS: N.E.P.A. is the process by which all those acts basically work together. N.E.P.A. doesn't mandate any specific outcomes. It's a process that is mandated through the Environmental Policy Act, and thirty-five years later, can we improve upon this process? And U.S. Representative Cathy McMorris of Washington phrases the end of her statement with a question for a reason. She is the chair of a House Resources Committee task force looking into ways to improve how N.E.P.A. works for all citizens. The purpose of the Act when it was first created thirty-five years ago, and up to today, is requirement of environmental impact statements for federal projects. And N.E.P.A. has a Northwest flavor as among its many creators was Washington Senator Henry Jackson. But McMorris is quick to point out that while considering environmental impacts was on Jackson's and other's minds when they created N.E.P.A., what was not foreseen was the impacts from a significant amount of paperwork. MCMORRIS: There's a statement by Senator Jackson who was one of the co-authors of this act that he never envisioned that an environmental impact statement would be more than six to eight pages long. And you look today, and there are hundreds, thousands of pages long, and the costs that are attributed to going through the process of the environmental impact statement are significant. But that isn't the only reason for Congressional consideration of N.E.P.A. improvements at best, and reform if need be. McMorris says the consideration also comes from the growing number of lawsuits filed by various groups in the name of N.E.P.A. Some say the litigation is necessary and within the rules, others say it is an abuse and an attempt to slow down or stop certain federal projects. But no matter the motive, Mc Morris says it still adds up. MCMORRIS: From those cases and decisions, you have hundreds of other cases and pending cases, and what the result is when you get into litigation is that it delays and it's costly. That is why the task force is holding a series of public hearings on N.E.P.A. starting with one last month in Spokane. What the House Resource Committee plans to do in its study of N.E.P.A., and what some affected by the Act say about it, are the topics of future programs.
Previous Report05/09/05 Any hope to get our beef back in?, Pt.2
Next Report05/11/05 N.E.P.A. reform?, Part Two