Recent Projects

The U.S. Global Change Research Program, which coordinates federal research and investments in understanding and responding to the forces shaping the global environment, engaged in a public consultation process on the outline for the U.S.’s first National Nature Assessment. Policy Integrity suggested changes to the outline in general and provided specific comments on some individual chapters, as requested. 

The National Environmental Policy Act requires agencies to take a hard look at the environmental impacts of their decisions, prior to acting. In this case, the Surface Transportation Board, after conducting an environmental review, permitted a proposed railway that would transport oil in Utah’s Uinta Basin. The D.C. Circuit found that the Board’s environmental analysis failed to properly consider the indirect effects of the railway, including increased drilling and pollution impacts in the Gulf Coast, due to an influx of crude oil and increased refinery operations. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in June 2024 on the question “whether the National Environmental Policy Act requires an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.” We argue the Court should affirm the D.C. Circuit’s ruling and interpret NEPA–in line with longstanding precedent–to require agencies to consider reasonably foreseeable effects. 

Policy Integrity submitted an amicus brief in support of the Department of the Interior and BOEM's 2024-2029 five-year leasing plan for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) resources, raising three main points. First, we review how the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act's (OCSLA) legislative history supports Interior's consideration of downstream effects when valuing OCS oil and gas resources. Second, Policy Integrity explained how Interior's decades-long regulatory practice in creating five-year leasing plans included consideration of downstream environmental effects in various ways, like assessing the relative environmental impacts of using different energy sources. Third, Policy Integrity explained why standard valuation practices support Interior's consideration of downstream public costs from OCS resource consumption alongside downstream private benefits from that same consumption.

In January, the White House announced a pause on LNG export approvals for the Department of Energy to update its underlying analyses for authorizations, which underpin its public interest determinations. In particular, the announcement notes that DOE’s economic and environmental analyses are outdated and calls for them to be updated. This letter offers recommendations for updating DOE’s analyses.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) recently approved the construction of a new natural gas pipeline that would run through New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The gas capacity this expensive pipeline would provide, most of which will serve New Jersey markets, is unnecessary to meet the demand of New Jersey customers: the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities commissioned a study that demonstrates as much. We submitted an amicus brief in support of petitioners challenging this pipeline. In our brief, we explain that, in approving pipeline applications, FERC has abdicated its statutory responsibility to examine whether a pipeline is truly needed. Instead of determining whether a pipeline would serve the public interest, FERC defers to the assertions of profit-motivated pipeline developers and their customers. FERC's practice of approving needless pipelines is particularly concerning in light of how it regulates the development of electric transmission infrastructure, a related regulatory process. We argue that FERC should have placed greater weight on the rigorous economic study conducted by an expert state agency charged with ensuring safe and adequate gas supply for its residents.