The Studying NEPA’s Impact on Projects Act amends NEPA (adding a new Section 201) to require the head of each lead federal agency to submit an annual report to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Reports must enumerate NEPA-related civil actions, provide EIS page counts, estimate preparation costs, and document completion timelines for major Federal actions, disaggregated by specified industry sectors.
CEQ must publish the submitted reports and underlying data on its website and deliver them to congressional committees. The statute prescribes precise metrics and time windows (annual litigation windows, five-year EIS page-count windows, and ten-year timeline windows) and calls for pre/post comparisons tied to the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
The law creates no new enforcement mechanism; it focuses on standardized transparency and data collection to support oversight, policymaking, and analysis of NEPA’s effects on projects.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires lead federal agencies to file annual reports to CEQ with detailed NEPA metrics: litigation filings and outcomes, environmental impact statement (EIS) page counts, cost estimates to prepare EISs, and milestone timelines for major Federal actions. CEQ must publish each report and the underlying data and provide the reports to key congressional committees.
Who It Affects
Lead federal agencies and their subagencies must assemble and submit the data; cooperating agencies, project sponsors, and contractors may need to provide cost and timeline information. CEQ bears responsibility for public publication and data hosting. Private litigants, courts, and industries listed as covered sectors will appear in the dataset.
Why It Matters
This creates, for the first time in statute, a recurring, standardized federal dataset on NEPA process metrics that can drive oversight, identify bottlenecks, and underpin reform proposals. Agencies and project sponsors will face new data-collection burdens, while policymakers and analysts gain empirically grounded evidence about how NEPA interacts with project timelines and litigation.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Beginning July 1, 2026, and each year thereafter, the head of every lead federal agency must submit a report to CEQ covering three categories of information. First, agencies must list civil actions alleging NEPA violations that were active in the 12-month window running from June 1 of the prior year to June 1 of the current year.
For each case agencies must identify plaintiffs and defendant lead agencies; the courts involved; the sector linked to the project; and the status or outcome (including court findings vacating agency action, decisions allowing agency action to proceed, remands without vacatur, settlements, ongoing cases, and awards of costs under 28 U.S.C. 2412).
Second, agencies must provide EIS length metrics over the prior five-year span ending June 1 of the current year: average and median page counts (excluding or separately counting citations/appendices), quartile breakdowns, counts by lead agency/subagency, and trend comparisons to prior CEQ reports. The statute requires that, through 2028, CEQ present a breakdown of these data before and after enactment of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.Third, the law requires cost and timeline data.
Cost reporting must estimate full-time equivalent (FTE) personnel hours, contractor charges, and other direct lead-agency costs for preparing EISs, and include cooperating-agency and project-sponsor costs where practicable. Timeline reporting covers a ten-year window ending June 1 of the current year and must record milestone dates for each major Federal action (application submission for permits, scoping start, notice of intent, EIS publication, record of decision, and the agency’s notice to proceed), plus averages, medians, trend descriptions, and a pre/post Fiscal Responsibility Act disaggregation through 2033.CEQ must publish the agency submissions and the underlying data on its website and deliver the compiled reports to the House Natural Resources Committee and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee; CEQ may incorporate these submissions into its existing annual report under section 107(h).
The statute directs CEQ to include citations or other locating information so the public can find court records for listed civil actions. The measure also defines a list of covered sectors (e.g., aviation and space, broadband, pipelines, renewable energy, surface transportation) and allows CEQ or lead agencies to add sectors as needed.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Lead agencies must submit reports to CEQ not later than July 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, covering a June 1–June 1 reporting window for litigation.
Litigation reporting must list plaintiffs and defendant lead agencies, courts involved, the alleged legal basis, sector, and the outcome status, including vacatur under 5 U.S.C. 706(2), remand without vacatur, settlements, ongoing status, and any EAJA awards under 28 U.S.C. 2412 (if available).
EIS length metrics cover the five-year period ending June 1 each report year and require average and median page counts, quartile breakdowns, separate accounting for citations/appendices, counts by lead agency/subagency, and trend comparisons to prior CEQ reports.
Cost reporting must estimate FTE personnel-hour costs, contractor costs, and other direct costs of the lead agency for preparing EISs and, where practicable, include cooperating agencies’, project sponsors’, and contractors’ costs.
Timeline metrics cover the ten-year period ending June 1 each report year and require milestone dates (application submission, scoping start, notice of intent, EIS publication, record of decision, notice to proceed) plus average/median completion times and a pre/post Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 disaggregation through specified years.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This is the formal naming provision: the Act may be cited as the 'Studying NEPA’s Impact on Projects Act.' It has no substantive effect but frames the focus of the amendment to NEPA Section 201.
Annual litigation reporting by lead agencies
This subsection obligates lead agencies to report each civil action alleging violation of NEPA that was active during the June-to-June reporting window. The statute specifies granular fields—parties, courts, sector, alleged basis, and a menu of possible outcomes (including vacatur under 5 U.S.C. 706(2), remand without vacatur, settlements, ongoing status, and EAJA awards). Practically, agencies will need case-tracking systems that tie legal matters to specific projects and sectors and will have to update subsequent reports if new award information arrives after the filing deadline.
EIS length metrics and cost estimates
Agencies must compile EIS page-count statistics over the prior five-year span and separately account for citations and appendices; the statute calls for averages, medians, quartiles, and counts by lead agency/subagency. Cost estimates must break out FTE time, contractor expenses, and other direct lead-agency costs; the law asks agencies to include cooperating-agency and project-sponsor costs 'if practicable' and to note when that is not practicable. Expect variability in how agencies calculate 'page count' and 'FTE hour' unless CEQ issues implementing guidance.
Ten‑year timeline metrics with defined project milestones
Reporting on timelines covers each major Federal action begun in the prior ten years and requires recorded dates for specific milestones (permit application submission, scoping start, NOI, EIS publication, ROD, and notice to proceed). Agencies must compute average and median completion times, report trends against prior CEQ reports, and provide a pre/post comparison tied to the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 for reports through 2033. The provision creates a longitudinal dataset intended to show where delays accumulate across the NEPA lifecycle.
CEQ publication duties and data format
CEQ must publish the reports and the underlying data on its website, include citations or locating information for court records, and submit the compiled material to specified congressional committees. The statute permits CEQ to include these submissions in the section 107(h) report. It also directs CEQ to disaggregate data by 'covered sector' where practicable, which places on CEQ the responsibility to standardize sector mapping across agencies for meaningful comparisons.
Definition of covered sectors
The statute lists 15 specific sectors (for example: aviation and space; broadband; pipelines; renewable energy; surface transportation; water resources) and allows CEQ or a lead agency to designate additional sectors. This explicit list shapes how agencies tag projects and binds CEQ to use sector-based reporting as the primary format for disaggregation.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Congressional oversight committees — receive consistent, standardized NEPA litigation, timeline, and cost data to inform oversight, hearings, and legislative options.
- Project sponsors and industry sectors (e.g., pipelines, renewable energy, transportation) — gain a public evidence base to benchmark average EIS lengths, costs, and timing against peers, which can support project planning and advocacy for targeted reforms.
- Policy researchers and analysts — obtain machine-readable underlying data and citations to court records that enable empirical study of NEPA’s interaction with litigation and project delivery.
- CEQ — gains statutory authority to centralize NEPA process data and to shape sector definitions and reporting formats, strengthening its role as the federal repository for NEPA metrics.
Who Bears the Cost
- Lead federal agencies and subagencies — must allocate staff and systems to collect, validate, and report litigation, page-count, cost, and milestone data on an annual basis.
- Cooperating agencies and project sponsors — may incur additional administrative or contract costs to provide practicable cost estimates and timeline data when agencies request it.
- CEQ — must host, publish, and curate the underlying dataset, ensure public access to court citations, and reconcile cross-agency data differences, which will require technical and analytic resources.
- Smaller agencies and subunits — may find the reporting burden disproportionate if they lack established case-tracking or cost-accounting systems, potentially diverting resources from program work.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is transparency versus administrative burden and potential chilling effects: the bill aims to provide objective data to diagnose NEPA-related delays and litigation patterns, but producing standardized, sector-disaggregated, and legally accurate data across diverse agencies will require significant time and resources and could deter some plaintiffs if reporting is perceived as exposing them to scrutiny.
The statute standardizes a range of NEPA metrics, but it leaves many implementation choices to agencies and CEQ. Measurement problems are real: agencies use different formats for EISs (single file vs. modular appendices), vary in how they record personnel hours and contractor invoices, and do not use uniform project identifiers.
Those differences will complicate year‑to‑year comparisons unless CEQ issues detailed guidance and data standards. The law tries to limit certain timing ambiguities by specifying milestone events (e.g., 'notice of intent' and 'record of decision'), yet milestones like 'notice to proceed' may not exist in identical form across federal programs, undermining comparability.
The litigation reporting requirement increases transparency but raises practical and legal questions. Listing plaintiffs, alleged bases, and courts improves traceability for oversight, but it may also produce tension over privacy or settlement confidentiality, and it could be read by some stakeholders as a tool to spotlight plaintiffs or disincentivize litigation.
The bill requires CEQ to publish citations to court records rather than full case documents, which helps public access while limiting CEQ’s exposure, but agencies will still need robust legal tracking to ensure accuracy. Finally, the statute includes pre/post breakouts tied to the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 for limited windows; that comparison will be informative only if CEQ controls for other policy and process changes that happened in the same periods.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.