The Supreme Court will soon issue its ruling in the first NEPA case it agreed to resolve in over twenty years. In Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, the Court is confronted with the crucial question about how far an agency must consider the upstream and downstream impacts of proposals for federal action. The Court’s decision has the potential to shape the scope of NEPA compliance for years to come. In this session, you’ll hear counsel of record for the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition and other experts give their initial take on the consequences of the Court’s decision.
This 1.5-hour webinar, jointly presented by NAEP and the Department of Energy (DOE), explores the innovative role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) within National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) processes and provides insights on DOE’s PolicyAI program for responsible AI use. As NEPA professionals face increasing data complexity, AI tools such as machine learning and natural language processing are transforming project assessments.
The first half of the presentation will focus on out-of-the-box AI tools that can be applied now to the NEPA process, detailing examples of practical applications, when to rely on the human element and limitations of the out-of-the-box tools. Emphasis will be placed on best practices for integrating AI into workflows to improve efficiency without compromising ethics.
DOE’s PolicyAI program will take center stage in the second half, addressing responsible AI use and limitations within NEPA frameworks. DOE will outline strategies for mitigating AI challenges, such as data bias, transparency, and interpretability, ensuring AI serves as a supportive tool rather than a replacement for expert judgment. This comprehensive session equips NEPA practitioners with actionable insights to effectively leverage AI, and the future of AI in the NEPA process.
Since the Supreme Court of the United States’ (SCOTUS) unanimous 1985 Riverside Bayview Homes v. US decision expanded the definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) to include more than just the nation’s “navigable waters,” debate on what should be considered a WOTUS has continued and, through much of this time, been complex and heated (e.g., SWANCC v. US (2001), Rapanos & Carabell v. US (2006)). For more than a decade following Rapanos, the WOTUS definition was based on the significant nexus test, as defined by Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion, which disagreed with much of Justice Scalia’s plurality opinion. Many thought that the SCOTUS’ 2023 Sackett decision provided the long-needed clarity to the WOTUS definition. On the ground regulatory interpretation/implementation of that decision has documented the opposite…inconsistent and unpredictable WOTUS determinations. Will the incoming Trump administration bring us back to its Navigable Waters Protection Rule, or another, even more restrictive definition?
Join two experts with over half a century of experience to hear a summary of the WOTUS definition’s meandering flow path, the flooding caused by its recent bank full events, as well as their prognostications on its next riffles.
NEPA Phase II Regulatory Changes- Expert Panel Discussion
October 1, 2024 | 11:00 AM (PT) / 2:00 PM (ET)
Speakers
Fred Wagner, Partner at Venable LLP Ted Boling, Partner at Perkins Coie Ron Lamb, Retired Senior NEPA Project Manager for the U.S. Marine Corps.
About
On September 3rd NAEP hosted a webinar with the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) on the recent changes to the NEPA implementing regulations. Now, join NAEP as we welcome a panel of industry experts and leaders on their reaction to these changes and what it means to agencies, project proponents, and consultants.
This presentation does not have an accompanying slide deck.
Fred Wagner, Partner at Venable LLP P.E. "Pam" Hudson, Esq., Attorney, Federal Aviation Administration Michael D. Smith, PhD, Senior Vice-President, WSP Melanie Hernandez, Esq., CEP, Environmental Attorney, Scout
About
This webinar will mirror the Case Law presentation provided during the recent NAEP 2024 Conference & Training Symposium, with updates as warranted. The panel is focused on a paper that reviews substantive National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) cases issued by the United States Courts of Appeals. The implications of the decisions and their relevance to NEPA practitioners will be explained. This webinar will summarize the more detailed paper prepared for the 2024 conference session. The paper briefly explains, with an emphasis on the substantive NEPA findings, each opinion issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals. The paper identifies statistics regarding the NEPA appellate opinions, such as a twelve-year record of NEPA cases, organized by circuit, and by year. The paper also identifies the agencies involved in each case and presents statistics relevant to the agencies; the paper further identifies the prevailing ratio of federal agencies, including by agency and by document type (categorical exclusion, environmental assessment, environmental impact statement). The paper analyzes the trends in the court opinions involving NEPA, with an emphasis on substantive NEPA practice, and by the grouping of the cases.
Finally, each court opinion is paraphrased and organized in a manner easy to read for practitioners to find the court's ruling. Appellate opinions are grouped and analyzed by agency. Past trends include challenges to purpose and need, alternatives considered, public comment, scientific impact assessment methodologies, GHG emissions and climate change impact assessment, incomplete or unavailable information, determination of significance, segmentation, duty to supplement, connected actions, federal actions, cumulative impact assessment, mitigation, monitoring, and adaptive management. Suggestions for improving the implementation of the NEPA process and to meeting current challenges are offered, looking ahead to the future with a renewed emphasis on one of the world's oldest and most forward-looking environmental laws.
