The Trump administration has made final an “interim” rule issued last February that overturns all White House Council on Environmental Quality regulations governing how agencies conduct environmental reviews of projects under the National Environmental Policy Act.
The final rule, published in the Jan. 8 Federal Register, does not eliminate the requirements of NEPA, enacted in 1970, and all agencies must develop regulations to undergo the project review process within its scope by the end of February 2026.
The council issued the interim rule last year in response to President Donald Trump’s desire to speed up approvals for projects requiring NEPA reviews, particularly projects that align with the current administration’s push to develop fossil fuel infrastructure, as well as to comply with a May 2025 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that narrowed the scope of what is required and what are reviews direct, instead of those that are direct. they have downstream potential.
Some observers say they don’t expect to see significant changes in how environmental impact statements and less-thorough environmental assessments are conducted, but others suggest there will be some confusion as agencies use different definitions or procedures to create their own regulations.
Several larger agencies have already published and finalized updated implementing regulations, including the Departments of Agriculture, Transportation, Interior, Defense, and Energy, as well as the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Mark Sudol, Washington, D.C.-based senior adviser at environmental permitting consultant Dawson & Associates and former head of the agency’s regulatory program, says he doesn’t expect huge disparities in the guidelines developed by each agency. The Corps’ regulations, published on July 3, are mainly in line with last year’s Supreme Court decision Seven Counties Infrastructure v. Eagle County, Colo., and to President Donald Trump’s “Unleashing American Energy” executive order issued on January 20, 2025.
The most significant change in the new Corps regulations is the elimination of a definition of what constitutes a “significant federal action” that would trigger an environmental impact statement, Sudol says, clarifying that comprehensive environmental reviews are required when projects are expected to have a “significant impact.”
“This decision won’t affect the Corps of Engineers very much,” he told ENR.
In formal comments Aug. 4 to the U.S. Department of Transportation following the publication of a final rule in July, Prianka Sharma, vice president and regulatory affairs counsel for the American Association of Highway and Transportation Builders, said the rule included “welcome process improvements” to the agency’s use of categorical exclusions, including basing them on definitions developed by other agencies and adopting new procedures of exclusion “These updates help streamline reviews of lower-impact projects and reflect a commitment to smarter resource allocation,” he wrote.
Eric Beightel, former executive director of the Federal Permitting Board, notes that there could be disparities between the agency’s regulations. “It’s a bit of a mix between the government, which is exactly what [council] The regulations were intended to be avoided by providing general direction to agencies,” he said in an email. “I have yet to see any notable examples of confusion between agencies, but I anticipate that confusion will occur sooner or later.” Beightel is now director of federal strategy for Environmental Science Associates in Washington, D.C.
In the final rule, the board says it has taken steps to “ensure consistency and efficiency in the agency’s implementation of NEPA in the absence of [its] regulations” and that it is in the process of publishing revised guidance in consultation with agencies that have already revised their NEPA enforcement rules.
