Proposed Transportation Bill Undermines Environmental Laws

(8 October 2002—Washington, D.C.) Testifying today before a House subcommittee, Environmental Defense transportation director Michael Replogle strongly opposed H.R. 5455, a bill that would undermine important provisions of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA).

“Passage of this bill will jeopardize public health, harm efforts to preserve endangered species and threaten valuable wetlands and communities by impairing accountability,” said Replogle.  “Some state transportation agencies have had trouble administering the 40% increase in funds they got in the last transportation bill.  To cover up their poor performance, shaky financing deals and accounting scandals, road builders want to cook the books, hide information and blame the environmentalists.”

Testifying before the Subcommittee on Highway and Transit, Replogle cautioned members of Congress that H.R. 5455, sponsored by Rep. Don Young (R-AK), would weaken environmental laws created under NEPA by setting arbitrary deadlines that are far too short to meet important goals.  The deadlines fail to give local officials, community groups, environmental agencies and scientists sufficient time to determine the impacts of proposed projects.  The bill also gives authority over projects to distant federal highway bureaucrats, leaving local and state transportation officials in the dark.

“Through early community involvement, sensible planning and utilization of existing programs, high quality highway projects can be advanced quickly and without discarding important environmental and historic resource safeguards, as the experience of Oregon and Vermont shows,” Replogle said.  “H.R. 5455 on the other hand would encourage development of more poorly planned, poorly designed highway projects and will spur conflict that will further hinder overall transportation progress.”

Replogle dismissed claims by proponents of H.R. 5455 that environmental reviews are too time consuming and create delays in highway projects.  The U.S. government’s own data included in Replogle’s testimony showed nearly two-thirds (63%) of projects are delayed because of lack of funding, low priority, local controversy and complexities stemming from project design and construction.