Department of Interior’s New NEPA

Background

On July 3, 2025, the Department of the Interior (“DOI”) published an interim final rule (“IFR”) partially rescinding and modifying existing agency-specific regulations for the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). In particular, DOI moved 31 of the 42 existing NEPA regulations into the DOI Handbook: National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures, adopting non-binding procedures in lieu of regulations for most provisions and providing DOI bureaus with discretion over whether to publish draft environmental documents.¹

These changes allow for quicker updates in policy implementation and avoidance of the restrictive nature of codified regulations and the procedures therein, including the required notice-and-comment process. Taken in concert,  the changes implemented in the IFR will allow for more flexibility in environmental review processes for DOI bureaus.

The revisions streamline the NEPA process for all DOI bureaus in an attempt to conform with statutory amendments made to NEPA in 2023 in the Fiscal Responsibility Act,² respond to President Trump’s Executive Order 14154 (Unleashing American Energy),³ and address the “pathologies of the NEPA process”⁴ and NEPA litigation identified by the Supreme Court in their recent decision: Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, 145 S. Ct. 1497 (2025).⁵ As the Supreme Court repeatedly emphasized, NEPA is a procedural statute only and does not mandate specific results or substantive outcomes.

DOI further clarified that its new NEPA procedures will have no effect on ongoing NEPA reviews that are “sufficiently advanced.” For those reviews, “DOI, following [Council on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”)] guidance, will continue to apply the preexisting procedures.”⁶

What regulations did DOI retain?

While DOI rescinded most of its regulations in favor of non-binding guidance, DOI retained and made clarifications to its emergency response regulations, categorical exclusions, and applicant- and contractor-prepared NEPA documents provisions.

Emergency response

Regarding its emergency response regulations, the IFR specifies that the changes made therein “do not change the meaning of the provisions”—rather, they offer clarifications and simplification of the already existing regulations.⁷ The IFR provides for either “[(a)] forgoing NEPA analysis so as to allow the bureau to take actions urgently needed to mitigate harm to life, property, or important natural, cultural, or historic resources[or (b) using] alternative arrangements for NEPA compliance to take other actions beyond those immediately necessary to protect life, property, and resources in response to emergencies.”⁸ Thus, DOI’s “Alternative Arrangements for NEPA Compliance” adopted earlier this spring remains in effect. The Alternative Arrangements guidance applies to qualified national energy emergency projects, providing a truncated review process: 14 days for Environmental Assessment review and 28 days for Environmental Impact Statement review.

Categorical exclusions

The IFR retained most of the existing categorical exclusions found at 43 C.F.R. § 46.210, with the exception of hazardous fuels reduction activities using prescribed fire and post-fire rehabilitation activities, which will be moved into guidance. Generally and perhaps more importantly, the IFR provides that DOI bureaus may apply multiple categorical exclusions to a single action and may rely on categorical exclusion determinations made by other agencies and categorical exclusions administratively established or adopted by another DOI bureau. Going forward, additional bureau-specific categorical exclusions will be identified in guidance documents.⁹

Applicant- and contractor-prepared NEPA documents

The IFR added a new section to the existing regulations, outlining the applicable standards and procedures bureaus must to follow when they use contractors or applicants to prepare environmental documents. While DOI regulations already allow bureaus to rely on applicant-prepared environmental assessments (“EAs”), the IFR proposes extending this allowance to applicant-prepared environmental impact statements (“EISes”), which are much more exhaustive.  Allowing bureaus to rely on applicant-prepared EISes will likely cut down on the time required for the EIS to be prepared, thereby reducing overall review timelines.

Insights

The significant trimming of DOI regulations are intended to allow for more flexibility both in implementing NEPA’s requirements and in promulgating new guidance. The transition of the requirements into a guidance Handbook and the associated paring down of opportunities for public comment will likely result in faster approvals of projects under DOI bureaus.

The Hogan Lovells team is prepared to assist in navigating project review and approval under the updated regulations and DOI Handbook.

Authored by Steward Forbes, Phil Sandick, and Evan Kudler.