NEPA has been subject of recent changes of an arguably substantial nature. The research idea suggests the perceived challenges with the law’s implementation may be overstated, uncommon, but most importantly, the result of those implementing the process. In other words, the human element may be the primary cause.

Licenses are intended to ensure only competent and ethical individuals practice in an occupation. Licenses may be issued by the government, often are time-limited needing renewal periodically, and are often implemented to create a standard of performance. NEPA, the process by which an informed decision is made, requires a unique skill set and certainly falls within this type of employment and unquestionably requires competent individuals committed to ethical practices.

Few examples of licensing needs include:
• Business: certified public accountants
• Physical public contact: barbers, cosmetologists, or massage therapists
• Building and design services: building contractors, land surveyors, engineers, architects, electricians, plumbing
• Mental and physical health: doctors, counselors, therapists.

The top reasons for earning a professional certification are:
• Validation of Skills and Knowledge
• Recognition of capability
• Greater degree of certainty and confidence in outcome
• Repeatable and more timely results
• Increased respect in profession
• Competitive Advantage
• Career Advancement
• Compensation Enhancement
As both an employer and job seeker, appropriate certifications could play an important role in hiring and ultimately performance. As of 2024, almost one in four occupations in the U.S. require licenses (in 1960, that number was one in 20).

Importantly, NEPA as enacted in 1970 is one of a few, if not the only, federal law outlining procedure leading to informed decision making. It requires an interdisciplinary, non-linear process to bring multiple factors to bear in a robust, informed, objective and predictable decision-making process. Effective NEPA results require unique skills rooted in leadership and specific procedures beyond knowledge of any one discipline. It is important to consider that an engineer must pass an exam to practice engineering, and an attorney must pass the BAR to practice law. If NEPA requires unique skills, then it should be considered that NEPA practitioners should also have a standard under which to operate.

The importance of NEPA in project delivery and the knowledge base to effectively lead it cannot be overstated nor undervalued. Arguably, the NEPA conclusion is of utmost importance as it:
• Conveys to the general public (aka, the taxpayer) what the agency plans to do moving forward;
• Supports soft thresholds like “hard look, full disclosure, and reasonable person” – these are not values any one discipline fully and completely comprehends;
• Often assesses impacts both positive and negative in terms of significance – both context and intensity – not regularly understood by technical analysts;
• Places the action to a level where certainties can be reached on cost, constructability, operational performance, and
• Ensures participation by all parties is available through purposeful means.

These are variables that without adequacy in trained oversight can lead to an undesirable and indefensible array of outcomes in findings, costs to deliver findings, schedule, etc. Guaranteed consistency in skill levels through appropriate licensing or certification may lead to defensible and timely outcomes in terms of increased predictability in:
• NEPA costs
• Project costs
• Schedule enhancements;
• Operational action performance,
• Public understanding of the proposal.

Time has shown that full disclosure and hard look are most often rooted in NEPA process. Legal actions most often are taken against lead agencies when process is not appropriately followed. Each step in the NEPA process has a myriad of decisions warranting a hard look and validation in order to be documented as defensible within the law itself. Without a guaranteed minimum base of knowledge, no guarantee can be made that such decisions reach those thresholds. A certification or licensing program would, at a minimum, lead participants towards a positive set of outcomes.

All too often, alleged delays and increased costs in project delivery fall onto the NEPA process. Most often, in response, technical features within related laws are changed in efforts to rectify the identified undesirable outcomes. Yet, little to nothing has been done to examine the possible root cause of the “problems”. As NEPA effectively infers, the process attempts to assess the interaction of humans with the surrounding environment. NEPA is a “human” process. Without examination of effectiveness and training of those leading NEPA efforts, it is arguably near impossible to determine the causes of problems in NEPA. Certification or licensing definitely would be step in the right direction by:
• Improving defensible outcomes,
• Recognizing the unique skill sets necessary to lead NEPA, and
• Recognizing NEPA delivery warrants the same level of minimum standards as other professions, like plumbing.

Importantly, NEPA as enacted in 1970 is the only federal law outlining procedure leading to informed decision making. It requires an interdisciplinary, non-linear process to bring multiple factors to bear in a more robust, informed, objective and predictable decision-making process. Put another way, effective results require unique and specific skills rooted in leadership and specific procedural beyond any specific knowledge to support a defensible process leading to informed decision making. These are not skills found in any one discipline but are unique to the specific service rendered in NEPA. It is important to consider that an engineer must pass an exam to practice, or an attorney must pass the BAR to practice law. If NEPA requires unique skills (certainly not prevalent in such cited professions), then does it not go without question, that perhaps NEPA practitioners should also have a standard under which to operate?

The importance of NEPA in project delivery and the knowledge base to effectively lead it can not be overstated nor undervalued. Arguably, the NEPA conclusion is of utmost importance as it:
• Conveys to the general public (aka, the taxpayer) what the agency plans to do moving forward;
• Supports soft thresholds like “hard look, full disclosure, and reasonable person” – these are not values any one discipline fully and completely comprehends;
• Often assesses impacts both positive and negative in terms of significance – both context and intensity – not regularly understood by technical analysts;
• Places the action to a level where certainties can be reached on cost, constructability, operational performance, and
• Ensures participation by all parties is available through purposeful means

These are variables that without adequacy in trained oversight can lead to an undesirable and undefensible array of outcomes in findings, costs to deliver findings, schedule, and … Guaranteed consistency in skill levels through appropriate licensing or certification may lead to defensible and timely outcomes in terms of increased predictability in:
• NEPA costs
• Project costs
• Schedule enhancements;
• Operational action performance,
• Public understanding of the proposal.

Time has shown that full disclosure and hard look are most often rooted in NEPA process. Legal actions most often are taken against lead agencies when process is not appropriately followed. Each step in the NEPA process has a myriad of decisions warranting a hard look and validation in order to be documented as defensible within the law itself. Without a guaranteed minimum base of knowledge, no guarantee can be made that such decisions reach those thresholds. A certification or licensing program would, at a minimum, lead participants towards a positive set of outcomes.

All too often, alleged delays and increased costs in project delivery fall onto the NEPA process. Most often, in response, technical features within related laws are changed in efforts to rectify the identified undesirable outcomes. Yet, little to nothing has been done to examine the possible root cause of the “problems”. As NEPA effectively infers, the process attempts to assess the interaction of humans with the surrounding environment. NEPA is a “human” process. Without examination of effectiveness and training of those leading NEPA efforts, it is arguably near impossible to determine the causes of problems in NEPA. Certification or licensing definitely would be step in the right direction by:
• Improving defensible outcomes,
• Recognizing the unique skill sets necessary to lead NEPA, and
• Recognizing NEPA delivery warrants the same level of minimum standards as other professions, like plumbing.