Environmental

Effective Management of Used Electronics

Effective Management of Used Electronics

 

On September 20, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the launch of the Sustainable Materials Management Electronics Challenge (SMM).  The initiate encourages manufacturers and retailers to make recycling and refurbishing a standard within the electronics industry. 

During the announcement, Lisa Feldt, the EPA Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response, was joined by major leaders like Best Buy, LG Electronics, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, and Staples.  The announcement occurred at the Vintage Tech Recyclers in Romeoville, Illinois. 

The companies participating in SMM have agreed to send 100 percent of all use electronics to third-party refurbishers and recycling centers.  The companies will also increase efforts to collect more use electronics from consumers. 

In order for a recycler to become certified, they need to undergo an audit that checks to see if recycling and management of the used electronics meets industry standards.  Many of the certified recyclers are growing.  For example, Vintage Tech Recyclers devoted 80 percent of all new jobs to third-party certification. 

EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson stated, “Already, the United States generates almost 2.5 million tons of electronic waste per year—and that number will only grow.  Used electronics have materials in them that can be recovered and recycled, reducing the economic costs and environmental impacts of securing and processing new materials for new products.”

The EPA makes clear that reliability on electronics increases the importance of recycling precious materials in the devices.  Electronics contain rare-earth metals, copper, plastic and glass, all of which can be recycled.  The mining of manufacturing of these materials uses energy and releases greenhouse gases, but by recycling the materials, the carbon footprint is reduced and industry prices slow. 

Dell, Sony, and Sprint have also agreed to work with the EPA to manage their used electronics. 

Source: Environmental Protection Agency

MS Operator Falsified Industrial Wastewater Records

MS Operator Falsified Industrial Wastewater Records


On November 9, 2012, the Department of Justice announced that the owner and operator of an environmental laboratory in Mississippi was charged for falsifying records about industrial wastewater and then obstructing an investigation by federal authorities.  The defendant, Teenie White, was charged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.  


White is the owner and operator of Mississippi Environmental Analytical Laboratories, Inc.  She faces three charges.  Two of the charges are for making false statements and the third charge is for obstructing justice.  


The indictment states that White was hired by the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to test waste water sample at various industrial manufacturers throughout the state.  White was required to compile month reports of discharge from the manufacturers and submit the results to the MDEQ.  


The indictment indicates that White falsely created three different discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) for testing that was never done in the first place.  She also created a false laboratory report and presented it to a client in order to prepare another DMR.  The false reporting occurred from February to August of 2009.  White lied to authorities she was approached by a federal agent who was investigating the information in the reports.  


White is subject to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each count of false statements.  She faces up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for obstruction.  She is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  


The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Richard J. Powers with the Environmental Crimes Section under the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, as well as Assistant U.S. Attorney Gaine Cleveland with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Mississippi.  


Source: U.S. Department of Justice

China is the Top Buyer and Exporter of Illegal Timber

China is the Top Buyer and Exporter of Illegal Timber

 

On November 29, 2012, the London-based Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) released a new report, titled Appetite for Destruction: China’s Trade in Illegal Timber.  The report reveals China is the largest importer, exporter, and consumer of illegal timber in the world, all the while emphasizing how policies in China (and the world’s largest importers from China) add to deforestation in Southeast Asia. 

The EIA estimates, conservatively, that China imported 18.5 million cubic meters of illegal timber in 2011 alone.  Such estimates are worth $3.7 billion. 

The largest timber consumers in the world—the United States, the European Union, and Australia—have passed legislation in the last decade to help protect shrinking forests and particularly rainforests.  The largest producing countries like Indonesia have also increased enforcement efforts to deter illegal logging. 

Still, China proceeds to import and export a massive amount of illegal timber. 

Faith Doherty, head of the EIA’s Forests Campaign, paints a clear picture of China’s illegal timber campaign: “China is now effectively exporting deforestation around the world.” 

The true extent of China’s illegal timber campaign has been investigated by EIA field investigators since 2004 in places like China itself, Indonesia, Laos, Madagascar, Mozambique, Myanmar, Far East Russia, and Vietnam. 

Doherty stresses that further legislation and enforcement need to immediately target illegal timber trading in East Asia before it’s too late.  She states, “Any further meaningful progress to safeguard the forests of the world is being undermined unless the Chinese Government acts swiftly and decisively to significantly strengthen its enforcement and ensure that illegal timber is barred from its markets.” 

The report goes as far to say “China’s Government has done virtually nothing to curb illegal imports” while ensuring current policies create a steady supply from illegal logging areas. 

Currently, the US Lacey Act and the EU Timber Regulation target illegal wood products from China, but the EIA states that such regulations need increasingly enforced. 

The EIA’s report states China needs to take the following legislative and industrial steps:

·  create clear prohibitions against imports on illegal logs

·  let the Commerce and Foreign Ministries and the State Forest Administration (SFA) help stop illegal logging

·  know the specific laws on timber production and trade from all other countries

·  help protect threatened tree species listed in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)

·  work with Chinese companies overseas to make revised policies mandatory

·  mandate laws that criminalize Chinese companies that bribe foreign officials

·  stop the influence of state-owned enterprises that export illegal timber to China

Source: Environmental Investigation Agency

Lesser Prairie Chicken Listed as Threatened, Habitat Exchanges to Occur

Lesser Prairie Chicken Listed as Threatened, Habitat Exchanges to Occur

 

On November 30, 2012, the Fish and Wildlife Service announced that the prairie chicken is now considered threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).  According to the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the decision by the Fish and Wildlife Service will likely cause state and federal wildlife agencies to issues stricter permits and operations of energy developers and ranchers in the bird’s habitat. 

The bird is mainly found in Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, and Colorado—states that all have large farming and ranching industries as well as large amounts of oil, gas, and wind energy development. 

David Festa, the Vice President of the Land, Water and Wildlife program for the EDF, states: “In the past, these kinds of ESA listing decisions have led to years of litigation and conflict.  Now, with the lesser prairie chicken, we’re working with land users to set up Wildlife Habitat Exchanges that provide cooperative, cost-effective habitat conservation.”  

After the listing of the lesser prairie chicken under the ESA, the EDF is going to work with landowners, developers, and companies that will help protect the chicken’s habitat at the lowest cost possible while letting industry continue in the areas without debate and litigation.  The Wildlife Habitat Exchanges will recruit private landowners—such as farmers and ranchers—to maintain the habitat of the chicken, and the land can then be leased to energy companies and other developers so the companies can meet obligations under the ESA to protect wildlife. 

Steve Swaffar with the Kansas Farm Bureau states: “Habitat Exchanges are a smart solution for threatened species such as the lesser prairie chicken.  Exchanges deliver quantifiable measures of habitat and resources, at the same time giving private landowners an opportunity to derive income by providing for the specific needs of the species, and continue to use their property for agriculture production.” 

The EDF reports that about 90 percent of the bird’s habitat is on private land.  Other states have used Habitat Exchanges in the past and the initiatives have proven extremely successful.  For example, Texas used Habitat Exchanges to protect the golden checked warbler and increase the bird’s numbers. 

The Fish and Wildlife Service’s listing was only an initial decision, and it has a year to make the final listing decision. 

David Festa remained optimistic about Wildlife Habitat Exchanges: “EDF supports Wildlife Habitat Exchanges as a proven model that could change the trajectory of the lesser prairie chicken.  It can bring the species back from the brink and put it on a path toward recovery before the final listing decision is made.” 

Source: Environmental Defense Fund

Rhinos May Become Extinct in 10 Years

Rhinos May Become Extinct in 10 Years

 

Despite tighter international controls on ivory, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) warns that African Rhinos may become extinct in 10 years if immediate action is not taken by the international community.  The WWF reports that 588 rhinos and tens of thousands of elephants were killed in 2012. 

There are several reasons for the increased amount of rhino poaching: the demand for rhino horn in Asia continues to increase, and local citizens in Africa can earn a substantial amount of money from just several poaches. 

Dr Joseph Okori, the WWF’s African Rhino Programme leader, states: “Villagers are at the bottom of the chain and can earn several months income through two or three days of poaching.  Huge amounts of money is in circulation.” 

The most demand for illegal ivory is in Asia, and particularly Viet Nam.  Large amounts of illegal ivory reach markets in China and Thailand as well.  There is a market expanding on rhinoceros horns as well.  For example, appliances capable of grinding up rhinoceros horns sell for about $450 in Vietnam. 

Laws and regulations against ivory trade already exist at the federal level and state level in the United States.  For example, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the African Elephant Conservation Act of 1989 specifically outlaw the trading of ivory, and state laws vary between jurisdictions.  The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITIES) also banned the illegal trading of ivory. 

Still, the WWF states that more regulations and stricter penalties need instituted and consuming nations need to decrease their demand for illegal ivory immediately to save the African Rhino. 

Namibia is an example of increasing protection for the African Rhino.  The country’s government works with local populations and developed a management plan to protect the rhinos.  The country has the lowest rate of poaching in all of Africa.  Similar management plans are reaching Botswana, South Africa, and Zambia as well. 

The WWF has also developed a DNA registry for a total of 5,600 rhinos.  The DNA information can help African governments track down and try poachers in court. 

Hakan Wirtén, the Secretary General of WWF Sweden, called out to the international community to help save the African Rhino: “We welcome the fact that the Swedish government has provided increased support for stricter border control, as well as other measures to combat smuggling and poaching.  Both governments and tourists need to take more responsibility.  People should absolutely not buy souvenirs from endangered species or carved ivory souvenirs while on holiday.” 

Source: World Wildlife Fund

 

 

Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit Filed Against TVA

Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit Filed Against TVA

 

On November 28, 2012, the Sierra Club announced it was filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).  The lawsuit states that the TVA failed to operate with transparency while it was taking public comments about a $1 billion project to continue the Gallatin coal plant. 

The TVA announced that it would stop taking public comments after November 30, but the Sierra Club claims that it failed to provide the public about environmental safety information in connection with its plan on the Gallatin coal plant.  The plans include the construction 150-foot ash landfills in wetlands near Old Hickory Lake. 

The Sierra Club admits that the lawsuit is a last-ditch effort to stop reconstruction plans on the aging coal plant.  In addition to the lawsuit, the Sierra Club has purchased online advertisement rights on three local newspaper websites and asked TVA to invest in clean energy solutions instead of focusing on again coal plants. 

Louise Gorenflo, the lead volunteer with the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign in Tennessee, stated: “TVA wants to spend more than one billion dollars to keep an aging, obsolete coal plant running.  To add insult to injury, TVA officials are trying to limit public comment so they can plow forward with their expensive and dangerous plan.  We’re taking these steps now to ensure that TVA can’t make billion-dollar decisions without public input.” 

The Sierra Club states that TVA has discouraged public comment since the beginning.  Officials with TVA only allowed 30 days of public comments, but public concern allowed for an extension of 14 days.  TVA is still withholding information that the Sierra Club asserts is public information. 

The Sierra Club partnered with an analysis firm called Synapse Energy Economics in August 2012 to show that the older coal plants operated by TVA were uneconomical to operate.  TVA decided to spend one billion dollars on making the coal plant meet current Clean Air standards, but the Sierra Club claims the renovations will affect ratepayers for decades.  To back up their claim, the Sierra Club has proved that an energy efficiency savings program can reduce enough energy consumption to shut down the Gallatin coal plant for good. 

An analysis by TVA also proved energy savings of 1.2 percent could phase out the Gallatin plant, but TVA still insists on updating the coal-fired plant. 

Vanessa Pierce, the Director of Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign in the Eastern Region, states: “TVA has an obligation to its ratepayers and the people who live in the Tennessee Valley.  Rate hike after rate hike – with no real investment in the clean energy future – is no longer acceptable.  TVA has the opportunity to phase out an obsolete and polluting coal plant in favor of energy efficiency.  The right choice is clear.” 

Source: Sierra Club

Study Says US will Not Meet Carbon Cutting Pledge

Study Says US will Not Meet Carbon Cutting Pledge

 

Countries from all over the world are currently meeting in Doha, the capital city of oil-rich Qatar, to develop a treaty to reduce the progression of global warming.  The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has already indicted drastic and immediate changes are needed in developed and developing countries to meet 2020 emissions goals. 

The current Kyoto protocol, the only international emissions treaty, received pledges from developed countries around the world to dramatically reduce emissions by 2015 in order to meet 2020 goals.

Members of countries’ negotiating teams, especially those of the United States, were mostly optimistic about steps being taken for 2020 goals, but a recent study states developing countries like the United States and Canada will unlikely meet their pledges. 

The results of the study were published by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (NEAA). 

According to the study, climate policies in the United States currently fail to reduce emissions reductions pledged to the UNFCCC—which is 17 percent below 2005 emissions levels by 2020. 

The US emission projections are lower than estimates in the past because the economic crisis and development in the energy sector.  Energy demand is shifting from coal to natural gas and helping to heat homes more than electricity generated from coal.  The recession has reduced consuming and ultimately emissions from consumption, but the United States still fails to meet 2020 pledges because it continues to build inefficient cars and coal-fired power stations.  

With current trends and policies, emissions will range from 6.3 to 6.5 gigatons (not including forestry emissions).  The United States has pledged 6.0 Gt or less by 2020. 

Furthermore, the study predicts that the “New Performance Standard” will have no effect on emissions in the future.  The Standard regulates emission levels at new power plants.  The study sites an impact analysis by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

The same goes for Canada.  The NEAA predicts Canada’s current climate policies will not meet pledges by 2020.  Canada has pledged an emissions target of 610 Megatons by 2020, but current estimates show the emissions ranging from 730 to 780 Mt (excluding forestry emissions). 

NEAA argues that the most important environmental policies in Canada are the standards set for small vehicles and coal-fire power generating plants.  However, Canada is unlikely to meet 2020 levels because existing power plants are allowed to operate for 50 more years under the new standards. 

Source: Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

 

New Clean Cities Projects Address Alternative Fuel Instrastructures

New Clean Cities Projects Address Alternative Fuel Instrastructures

 

On November 19, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced funding for 20 new projects that will help states and local governments develop infrastructure, training, and planning to increase the demand for cars and trucks running off of natural gas, electricity, and propane. 

Some of the cities and funds projects are listed below:

Accelerating Alternatives for Minnesota Drivers

The project is led by the state’s American Lung Association and plans to develop plans for statewide natural gas implementation and more. 

California Fleets and Workplace Alternative Fuels Project

The project is led by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and will develop templates for an AFV refueling infrastructure and more. 

Southeast Regional Alternative Fuels Market Initiatives Program

The project is led by the Center for Transportation and the Environment in Atlanta and will help municipalities obtain alternative fuel vehicles, technician training for the vehicles, and more.

Central Texas Fuel Independence Project

The project is led by the city of Austin and Austin Energy and hopes to expand an alternative fueling infrastructure through training and workshops. 

Michigan Fuel Forward

The project is led by the Clean Energy Coalition in Ann Arbor and will recommend changes of codes, regulations, and permit requirements to encourage alternative fuels and AFV options. 

Fast Track to Ohio AFV Adoption

The project is led by Clean Fuels Ohio in Columbus and plans to speed up state and local processes needed to develop alternative fuel vehicles (AFV) and supporting infrastructure. 

Pennsylvania Partnership for Promoting Natural Gas Vehicles

The project is led by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission in Philadelphia and plans to work with municipalities and school district to convert buses to run off of natural gas and more. 

Removing Barriers, Implementing Policies, and Advancing Alternative Fuel Markets in New England

The project is led by the Greater Portland Council of Governments in Portland and plans to make alternative fuels more available across New England States excluding Connecticut.  The project will pull together permits for alternative fuels, create safety protocols, and develop standards for fuel assessments and labeling. 

Advancing Alternative Fuel Markers Adoption and Growth

The project is led by the Greater Washington Region Clean Cities Coalition, Inc in Washington D.C. and plans to develop fire and building codes for alternative fueling, creates uniform signs for alternative fuel, and more. 

Unlocking Private Sector Financing for Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Fueling Infrastructure

The project is led by the National Association of State Energy Officials in Alexandria, Virginia and plans to create statewide energy planning guidelines for alternative fuels, vehicles, and infrastructure. The project hopes to further explain the benefits of alternative fuels to state energy officials. 

Advancing Alternative Fuel Markets in Florida

The project is led by the University of Central Florida and plans to develop model codes, ordinances, guidelines for purchases and training programs, and more.  The project intends to develop a plan for statewide alternative fuel infrastructure. 

You can view the whole list of funded projects on the DOE’s website.  The smallest amount of funding went to St. Paul ($248,788), and the most went to San Francisco ($1,000,000). 

Source: Department of Energy

WTO Rules against Successful Canadian Clean Energy Program

WTO Rules against Successful Canadian Clean Energy Program

 

On November 19, 2012, the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled against Ontario’s renewable energy incentives program, a program intended to lower carbon emissions and create more clean energy jobs.  The WTO ruled that the program, or “feed-in-tariff,” violated rules that make it unlawful for a nation or state to favor local and domestic firms and products over foreign firms and products. 

The Sierra Club and Public Citizen Global Trade Watch expressed disappointment with the WTO’s ruling and even called the WTO’s recent and former actions a threat against development of clean energy in the future. 

Ilana Solomon, a Sierra Club Trade Representative, stated: “As countries take steps to address the climate crisis, the last thing we need is the WTO interfering with innovative climate programs.  Ontario’s solar and wind incentives program seeks to reduce dangerous carbon pollution and create clean energy jobs, and it should serve as a model for other countries, not a punching bag.” 

The Sierra Club and Public Citizen also showed disappointment with the United States.  The United States submitted a third-party brief during the case and showed how Ontario’s program violated rules imposed by the WTO.

Solomon continued, “Instead of attacking another countries’ clean energy program, the U.S. government should focus on how we will build on our own solutions to tackle the climate crisis and create clean energy jobs.” 

The incentives program in Ontario was formed under the Green Energy and Green Economy Act of 2009.  The incentives ensured that that the Ontario Power Authority, Ontario’s public electricity utility, paid competitive prices for green technology they produced over the next 20 years.  Since 2009, the program showed considerable success by forming contracts for about 4,600 megawatts of clean energy and creating over 20,000 jobs. 

The Sierra Club has called the recent ruling a trend by the WTO against green energy and health policies.  For example, the WTO ruled that U.S. dolphin-safe tuna labels were unsafe in May 2012 because they discriminated against Mexican tuna fishers.  In April 2012, the WTO ruled against the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 that stopped the sale of candy cigarettes.  In June 2012, the WTO ruled against country-of-origin labeling (COOL) for meat that helped Americans identify where their food was coming from and helped health officials track food disease outbreaks.

Lori Wallach, the Public Citizen Global Trade Watch Director, stated: “Only an attack on this sort of job-creating, climate-chaos-combating policy could put the WTO in worse repute than last year’s string of WTO rulings ordering us to gut popular U.S. laws on country-of-origin meat labels, dolphin-safe tuna labels and limits on candy-flavored cigarettes marketed to kids.”

Source: Sierra Club

Environmental Policy Act

Environmental Policy Act





What is the National Environmental Policy Act?
The National Environmental Policy Act is a federal law that formally established a U.S. national policy responsible for promoting the enhancement of the environment. The National Environmental Policy Act, which was enacted on January 1st of 1970, also established the President’s Council on Environmental Quality. 
The most significant effect of the National Environmental Policy Act came in the form of procedural requirements; the legislation instituted requirements for all agencies of the federal government in order to prepare Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Assessments. These procedural requirements contain statements of the environmental effects of proposed—and subsequently instituted—federal agency actions. The National Environmental Policy Act’s procedural requirements apply to all agencies of the United States Federal Government’s Executive Branch. The National Environmental Policy Act; however, does not apply to the President, the federal courts or to Congress.
History of the National Environmental Policy Act:
The National Environmental policy Act of 1969 was enacted by the 91st United States Congress. The legislation came into existence following increasing public awareness and appreciation for the environment; growing concerning about the well-being of wildlife and ecosystems also contributed to the passing of the National Environmental Policy Act 1969. 
Another major influence for enacting the national Environmental Policy Act were the freeway revolts that occurred in response to the construction of the Interstate Highway System—a project that required deforestation and the bulldozing of communities around the Nation. As a result of the public’s outcry following this project, the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act were then applied to any subsequent federal, state or local project. Court rulings throughout the history of the National Environmental Policy Act have since expanded the regulations for NEPA-related studies or endeavors to include actions where permits for a federal agency are necessary, regardless of whether or not the project is federally funded. Although the act was enacted in 1970, the legislation is referred to as the “National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.” 
Basic Information Concerning the National Environmental Policy Act:
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 establishes the national environmental policy and the coordinating goals for the protection, enhancement and maintenance of the environment. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 also provides a formal process for implementing these goals within the agencies of the United States Federal Government. 
The National Environmental Policy Act contains three primary sections:
The declaration of national policies and goals regarding the environment
The establishment of action-forcing procedures and provisions; federal agencies are required to enforce these policies and goals.
The formal establishment of a Council on Environmental Quality; this office is positioned within the Executive Office of the President. 
The purpose of these sections is to ensure that environmental concerns are evaluated equally when compared to other factors in the decision making process of the coordinating federal agencies. The National Environmental Policy Act, to establish the nation’s environmental policy, offers a multidisciplinary approach to assessing environmental effects with regard to federal government decision making. 
As stated above, the national Environmental Policy Act of 1969 formally established the President’s Council on Environmental Quality. This board was created to advise the President (and the Executive Branch) in the preparation of annual reports regarding the quality of the environment. These reports address the state of federal agencies and their actions concerning environmental quality. 
The National Environmental Policy Act 0f 1969 is an action-forcing piece of legislation; violations of the laws do not carry criminal or civil actions. Enforcement of the Act is obtained through the process of the United States court system. 
The National Environmental policy Act covers a number of federal agency actions; however, the legislation does not apply to wholly private or purely public state actions—such a provision denotes an absence of public influence or funding concerning a specific action. 
Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act:
Title I of the National Environmental Policy Act contains the Declaration of National Environmental policy, which mandates the federal government to use all means to create and subsequently maintain conditions under which humans and nature can exist in fecund harmony. 
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act requires all agencies of the Federal Government to incorporate environmental considerations in regards to planning and decision-making procedures through a systematic approach. More specifically, these agencies are required to prepare detailed statements to assess the environmental impact of and more efficient alternatives to federal actions that affect the environment. Title II of the National Environment Policy Act establishes the Council on Environmental Quality. 
Information Regarding the Council on Environmental Quality:
The Council on Environmental Quality oversees the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The Council, which is headed by a Chairman, is responsible for fulfilling the following duties and functions:
The Council on Environmental Quality gathers information concerning the conditions and trends regarding environmental quality
Develops and promotes national policies to improve environmental quality 
Evaluates federal programs in conjunction with the foals established in Title I of the National Environmental Policy Act
Conducts studies, research, analyses and surveys relating to environmental quality and the nation’s ecosystems. 
The National Environmental Policy Act’s Process:
The process aligned with the National Environmental Process consists of an evaluation of the effects of a federal undertaking and alternative procedures in alignment with the environment. There are three levels of evaluation within the National Environmental Policy Act: preparation of an environmental assessment; categorical exclusion of determination; and a preparation of environmental impact statements.
Categorical exclusions represent the first level of the National Environmental Policy’s Process. At this level, an undertaking may be excluded from the government’s environmental analysis, only if certain criterion, with which a federal agency has previously determined as ineffective, is met. Several federal agencies utilize lists of actions that are categorically excluded from environmental evaluation under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 
The Environmental Assessment/finding of no significant impact level of evaluation requires a federal agency to prepare a written environmental assessment in order to determine whether a federal undertaking would significantly affect the environment. If the evaluation yields inconclusive evidence, the underlying agency will issue a finding of “no significant impact.” The “finding of no significant impact” may address procedures which an agency will take to disrupt or mitigate potentially significant impacts.
The third level of analysis, the preparation of an environmental impact statement, is affirmed if the environmental consequences of a federal undertaking are deemed significant. An environmental impact statement is a detailed evaluation of the proposed action and its alternatives. If the agency anticipates that a procedure may impact the environment or if the undertaking is considered controversial, the agency may choose to prepare an environmental impact statement without having to prepare an environmental assessment.
The Role of the Federal Government:
The exact role of a federal agency within the National Environmental Policy Act will depend on the entity’s relationship and expertise to the proposed undertaking. That being said, the agency carrying out the action is responsible for complying with the requirements listed under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 
In some cases, multiple federal agencies will be involved with the process; in this situation, a lead agency will be designated to supervise preparation of the analysis. 
Any federal state or local agency in possession of special expertise with regard to an environmental concern may be considered a cooperating agency in the National Environmental Policy Act’s process. Cooperating agencies have the responsibility to assist lead agencies by participating in the legislation’s process. 
Full Text of the Environmental Policy Act of 1969:
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended
(Pub. L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, January 1, 1970, as amended by Pub. L. 94-52, July 3, 1975, Pub. L. 94-83, August 9, 1975, and Pub. L. 97-258, § 4(b), Sept. 13, 1982)
An Act to establish a national policy for the environment, to provide for the establishment of a Council on Environmental Quality, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.”
Purpose
Sec. 2 [42 USC § 4321].
The purposes of this Act are: To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality.
TITLE I
CONGRESSIONAL DECLARATION OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Sec. 101 [42 USC § 4331].
(a) The Congress, recognizing the profound impact of man’s activity on the interrelations of all components of the natural environment, particularly the profound influences of population growth, high-density urbanization, industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and new and expanding technological advances and recognizing further the critical importance of restoring and maintaining environmental quality to the overall welfare and development of man, declares that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation with State and local governments, and other concerned public and private organizations, to use all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans.
(b) In order to carry out the policy set forth in this Act, it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may –
1. fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations;
2. assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
3. attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences;
4. preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity, and variety of individual choice;
5. achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and
6. enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources.
(c) The Congress recognizes that each person should enjoy a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.
Sec. 102 [42 USC § 4332].
The Congress authorizes and directs that, to the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regulations, and public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in this Act, and (2) all agencies of the Federal Government shall –
(A) utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decisionmaking which may have an impact on man’s environment;
(B) identify and develop methods and procedures, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality established by title II of this Act, which will insure that presently unquantified environmental amenities and values may be given appropriate consideration in decisionmaking along with economic and technical considerations;
(C) include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on –
(i) the environmental impact of the proposed action,
(ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented,
(iii) alternatives to the proposed action,
(iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and
(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.
Prior to making any detailed statement, the responsible Federal official shall consult with and obtain the comments of any Federal agency which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved. Copies of such statement and the comments and views of the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, which are authorized to develop and enforce environmental standards, shall be made available to the President, the Council on Environmental Quality and to the public as provided by section 552 of title 5, United States Code, and shall accompany the proposal through the existing agency review processes;
(D) Any detailed statement required under subparagraph (C) after January 1, 1970, for any major Federal action funded under a program of grants to States shall not be deemed to be legally insufficient solely by reason of having been prepared by a State agency or official, if:
(i) the State agency or official has statewide jurisdiction and has the responsibility for such action,
(ii) the responsible Federal official furnishes guidance and participates in such preparation,
(iii) the responsible Federal official independently evaluates such statement prior to its approval and adoption, and
(iv) after January 1, 1976, the responsible Federal official provides early notification to, and solicits the views of, any other State or any Federal land management entity of any action or any alternative thereto which may have significant impacts upon such State or affected Federal land management entity and, if there is any disagreement on such impacts, prepares a written assessment of such impacts and views for incorporation into such detailed statement.
The procedures in this subparagraph shall not relieve the Federal official of his responsibilities for the scope, objectivity, and content of the entire statement or of any other responsibility under this Act; and further, this subparagraph does not affect the legal sufficiency of statements prepared by State agencies with less than statewide jurisdiction.
(E) study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended courses of action in any proposal which involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources;
(F) recognize the worldwide and long-range character of environmental problems and, where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States, lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs designed to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and preventing a decline in the quality of mankind’s world environment;
(G) make available to States, counties, municipalities, institutions, and individuals, advice and information useful in restoring, maintaining, and enhancing the quality of the environment;
(H) initiate and utilize ecological information in the planning and development of resource-oriented projects; and
(I) assist the Council on Environmental Quality established by title II of this Act.
Sec. 103 [42 USC § 4333].
All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance with the purposes and provisions of this Act and shall propose to the President not later than July 1, 1971, such measures as may be necessary to bring their authority and policies into conformity with the intent, purposes, and procedures set forth in this Act.
Sec. 104 [42 USC § 4334].
Nothing in section 102 [42 USC § 4332] or 103 [42 USC § 4333] shall in any way affect the specific statutory obligations of any Federal agency (1) to comply with criteria or standards of environmental quality, (2) to coordinate or consult with any other Federal or State agency, or (3) to act, or refrain from acting contingent upon the recommendations or certification of any other Federal or State agency.
Sec. 105 [42 USC § 4335].
The policies and goals set forth in this Act are supplementary to those set forth in existing authorizations of Federal agencies.
TITLE II
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Sec. 201 [42 USC § 4341].
The President shall transmit to the Congress annually beginning July 1, 1970, an Environmental Quality Report (hereinafter referred to as the “report”) which shall set forth (1) the status and condition of the major natural, manmade, or altered environmental classes of the Nation, including, but not limited to, the air, the aquatic, including marine, estuarine, and fresh water, and the terrestrial environment, including, but not limited to, the forest, dryland, wetland, range, urban, suburban an rural environment; (2) current and foreseeable trends in the quality, management and utilization of such environments and the effects of those trends on the social, economic, and other requirements of the Nation; (3) the adequacy of available natural resources for fulfilling human and economic requirements of the Nation in the light of expected population pressures; (4) a review of the programs and activities (including regulatory activities) of the Federal Government, the State and local governments, and nongovernmental entities or individuals with particular reference to their effect on the environment and on the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources; and (5) a program for remedying the deficiencies of existing programs and activities, together with recommendations for legislation.
Sec. 202 [42 USC § 4342].
There is created in the Executive Office of the President a Council on Environmental Quality (hereinafter referred to as the “Council”). The Council shall be composed of three members who shall be appointed by the President to serve at his pleasure, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President shall designate one of the members of the Council to serve as Chairman. Each member shall be a person who, as a result of his training, experience, and attainments, is exceptionally well qualified to analyze and interpret environmental trends and information of all kinds; to appraise programs and activities of the Federal Government in the light of the policy set forth in title I of this Act; to be conscious of and responsive to the scientific, economic, social, aesthetic, and cultural needs and interests of the Nation; and to formulate and recommend national policies to promote the improvement of the quality of the environment.
Sec. 203 [42 USC § 4343].
(a) The Council may employ such officers and employees as may be necessary to carry out its functions under this Act. In addition, the Council may employ and fix the compensation of such experts and consultants as may be necessary for the carrying out of its functions under this Act, in accordance with section 3109 of title 5, United States Code (but without regard to the last sentence thereof).
(b) Notwithstanding section 1342 of Title 31, the Council may accept and employ voluntary and uncompensated services in furtherance of the purposes of the Council.
Sec. 204 [42 USC § 4344].
It shall be the duty and function of the Council –
1. to assist and advise the President in the preparation of the Environmental Quality Report required by section 201 [42 USC § 4341] of this title;
2. to gather timely and authoritative information concerning the conditions and trends in the quality of the environment both current and prospective, to analyze and interpret such information for the purpose of determining whether such conditions and trends are interfering, or are likely to interfere, with the achievement of the policy set forth in title I of this Act, and to compile and submit to the President studies relating to such conditions and trends;
3. to review and appraise the various programs and activities of the Federal Government in the light of the policy set forth in title I of this Act for the purpose of determining the extent to which such programs and activities are contributing to the achievement of such policy, and to make recommendations to the President with respect thereto;
4. to develop and recommend to the President national policies to foster and promote the improvement of environmental quality to meet the conservation, social, economic, health, and other requirements and goals of the Nation;
5. to conduct investigations, studies, surveys, research, and analyses relating to ecological systems and environmental quality;
6. to document and define changes in the natural environment, including the plant and animal systems, and to accumulate necessary data and other information for a continuing analysis of these changes or trends and an interpretation of their underlying causes;
7. to report at least once each year to the President on the state and condition of the environment; and
8. to make and furnish such studies, reports thereon, and recommendations with respect to matters of policy and legislation as the President may request.
Sec. 205 [42 USC § 4345].
In exercising its powers, functions, and duties under this Act, the Council shall –
1. consult with the Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality established by Executive Order No. 11472, dated May 29, 1969, and with such representatives of science, industry, agriculture, labor, conservation organizations, State and local governments and other groups, as it deems advisable; and
2. utilize, to the fullest extent possible, the services, facilities and information (including statistical information) of public and private agencies and organizations, and individuals, in order that duplication of effort and expense may be avoided, thus assuring that the Council’s activities will not unnecessarily overlap or conflict with similar activities authorized by law and performed by established agencies.
Sec. 206 [42 USC § 4346].
Members of the Council shall serve full time and the Chairman of the Council shall be compensated at the rate provided for Level II of the Executive Schedule Pay Rates [5 USC § 5313]. The other members of the Council shall be compensated at the rate provided for Level IV of the Executive Schedule Pay Rates [5 USC § 5315].
Sec. 207 [42 USC § 4346a].
The Council may accept reimbursements from any private nonprofit organization or from any department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government, any State, or local government, for the reasonable travel expenses incurred by an officer or employee of the Council in connection with his attendance at any conference, seminar, or similar meeting conducted for the benefit of the Council.
Sec. 208 [42 USC § 4346b].
The Council may make expenditures in support of its international activities, including expenditures for: (1) international travel; (2) activities in implementation of international agreements; and (3) the support of international exchange programs in the United States and in foreign countries.
Sec. 209 [42 USC § 4347].
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the provisions of this chapter not to exceed $300,000 for fiscal year 1970, $700,000 for fiscal year 1971, and $1,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter.
The Environmental Quality Improvement Act, as amended (Pub. L. No. 91- 224, Title II, April 3, 1970; Pub. L. No. 97-258, September 13, 1982; and Pub. L. No. 98-581, October 30, 1984.
42 USC § 4372.
(a) There is established in the Executive Office of the President an office to be known as the Office of Environmental Quality (hereafter in this chapter referred to as the “Office”). The Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality established by Public Law 91-190 shall be the Director of the Office. There shall be in the Office a Deputy Director who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(b) The compensation of the Deputy Director shall be fixed by the President at a rate not in excess of the annual rate of compensation payable to the Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
(c) The Director is authorized to employ such officers and employees (including experts and consultants) as may be necessary to enable the Office to carry out its functions ;under this chapter and Public Law 91-190, except that he may employ no more than ten specialists and other experts without regard to the provisions of Title 5, governing appointments in the competitive service, and pay such specialists and experts without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates, but no such specialist or expert shall be paid at a rate in excess of the maximum rate for GS-18 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of Title 5.
(d) In carrying out his functions the Director shall assist and advise the President on policies and programs of the Federal Government affecting environmental quality by –
1. providing the professional and administrative staff and support for the Council on Environmental Quality established by Public Law 91- 190;
2. assisting the Federal agencies and departments in appraising the effectiveness of existing and proposed facilities, programs, policies, and activities of the Federal Government, and those specific major projects designated by the President which do not require individual project authorization by Congress, which affect environmental quality;
3. reviewing the adequacy of existing systems for monitoring and predicting environmental changes in order to achieve effective coverage and efficient use of research facilities and other resources;
4. promoting the advancement of scientific knowledge of the effects of actions and technology on the environment and encouraging the development of the means to prevent or reduce adverse effects that endanger the health and well-being of man;
5. assisting in coordinating among the Federal departments and agencies those programs and activities which affect, protect, and improve environmental quality;
6. assisting the Federal departments and agencies in the development and interrelationship of environmental quality criteria and standards established throughout the Federal Government;
7. collecting, collating, analyzing, and interpreting data and information on environmental quality, ecological research, and evaluation.
(e) The Director is authorized to contract with public or private agencies, institutions, and organizations and with individuals without regard to section 3324(a) and (b) of Title 31 and section 5 of Title 41 in carrying out his functions.
42 USC § 4373. Each Environmental Quality Report required by Public Law 91-190 shall, upon transmittal to Congress, be referred to each standing committee having jurisdiction over any part of the subject matter of the Report.
42 USC § 4374. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the operations of the Office of Environmental Quality and the Council on Environmental Quality not to exceed the following sums for the following fiscal years which sums are in addition to those contained in Public Law 91- 190:
(a) $2,126,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1979.
(b) $3,000,000 for the fiscal years ending September 30, 1980, and September 30, 1981.
(c) $44,000 for the fiscal years ending September 30, 1982, 1983, and 1984.
(d) $480,000 for each of the fiscal years ending September 30, 1985 and 1986.
42 USC § 4375.
(a) There is established an Office of Environmental Quality Management Fund (hereinafter referred to as the “Fund”) to receive advance payments from other agencies or accounts that may be used solely to finance –
1. study contracts that are jointly sponsored by the Office and one or more other Federal agencies; and
2. Federal interagency environmental projects (including task forces) in which the Office participates.
(b) Any study contract or project that is to be financed under subsection (a) of this section may be initiated only with the approval of the Director.
(c) The Director shall promulgate regulations setting forth policies and procedures for operation of the Fund.