Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (336251)	11/29/2009 10:08:04 AM
From: ManyMoose	Respond to of 793969

It's too bad because the good effects of NEPA are already in place, but it doesn't prevent the gratuitous lawsuits nor the endless boiler plate that NEPA teams keep adding on. It's not uncommon for a plan that was intended to be in force for ten years to take fifteen years to complete. Then at the end, there's an appeal process and an EIS or EA can be stopped literally in the eleventh hour by an appeal, which, if upheld, stops the project in its tracks. It's a terribly inefficient process that had good intent but has completely lost its bearings, in my opinion. There's nothing wrong at all with the following ethic from your link: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision making processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions. epa.gov It's the bastardization of the process by special interest groups that get their jollies and funding by mounting attacks on federal projects that could be efficient and profitable for the tax payers that is objectionable.