On Sept. 29, 2025, CEQ released updated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementation guidance and an associated agency implementing procedures template.
The nonbinding guidance updated the guidance issued in February by CEQ. The updated guidance told agencies they only have to consider the “proposed action at hand” when determining the scope of a project, and explained, “an agency is not required by NEPA to analyze environmental effects from other projects separate in time, or separate in place, or that fall outside of the agency’s regulatory authority, or that would have to be initiated by a third party,” citing to Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, 145 S. Ct. 1497 (2025).
The new guidance explained updated procedures based on a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act which “allows project sponsors to pay a fee to obtain shortened NEPA review deadlines.” It also laid out a timeline for CEQ consultation and provided a non-binding guidance document for agencies to follow as they create their own NEPA regulations.
As with the February CEQ guidance, CEQ’s new guidance did not direct agencies to consider climate change or environmental justice concerns.
For more, see our NEPA Overview. For litigation associated with NEPA, see our Regulatory Tracker.
Background
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of certain proposed actions. While NEPA does not require agencies to adopt the least environmentally impactful alternative, there are many instances when the NEPA process has positively affected agency decisions through the consideration of information about a project’s design, and the potential of alternatives to improve benefits for nearby communities and the environment. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has historically issued regulations outlining how federal agencies can comply with NEPA. Those rules provided a single framework for project proponents while giving flexibility to each agency.
On May 1, 2024, CEQ issued its final Phase II rule (the “Bipartisan Permitting Reform Implementation Rule”) implementing NEPA. Key changes in the Phase II rule included updates to implement recent amendments to NEPA under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, new definitions affecting the scope and substance of agencies’ environmental analyses, and requirements to consider Indigenous Knowledge, account for potential impacts on communities with environmental justice concerns, and strengthen early consultation with potentially impacted communities. The rule went into effect on July 1, 2024. However, on Feb. 3, 2025, a federal judge vacated CEQ’s Phase II rule, finding that NEPA does not authorize CEQ to issue binding regulations.
On April 20, 2022, CEQ finalized its “Phase 1” rule, undoing several Trump-era revisions to NEPA. The final rule restored three provisions from the original 1978 rule: (1) correcting 2020 changes that required an agency to limit consideration of the public interest and reasonable alternatives; (2) clarifying that agencies have discretion to go beyond requirements set by CEQ; and (3) restoring the definitions of direct and indirect effects and cumulative impacts, and removing other language that could narrow the scope of agencies’ NEPA analysis. CEQ said it would “more broadly revisit” the 2020 NEPA regulations in a “Phase 2” rule.
On Feb. 25, 2025, CEQ issued an interim final rule revoking the agency’s regulations implementing NEPA. Comments on the interim final rule were due March 27, 2025. Read comments submitted at regulations.gov. Federal agencies were still bound by their own NEPA regulations, many of which were decades-old and inconsistent with NEPA as amended in 2023. CEQ also issued guidance recommending federal agencies revise their NEPA rules within one year. Notably, that guidance required agencies to “expedite permitting approvals” and prioritize “efficiency and certainty over any other policy objectives.” CEQ’s guidance also states agencies’ NEPA documents “should not” include an environmental justice analysis in light of President Trump’s revocations of executive orders 12898 and 14096.