The Federal Highway Administration announced on November 3, 2025, that it has received and reviewed an application from the Maine Department of Transportation to join the Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program. This program, established under 23 U.S.C. 327, enables states to assume the FHWA's responsibilities for environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act and related federal laws for qualifying highway projects. The FHWA has deemed the application complete and prepared a draft memorandum of understanding with MaineDOT, detailing the proposed delegation of duties. Public comments on the application and draft MOU are invited until December 3, 2025, marking a key step toward potentially expediting infrastructure projects in Maine while ensuring environmental compliance.
Background on the NEPA Assignment Program
The Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program, often called the NEPA Assignment Program, was created by Congress to allow states to take on federal environmental review roles traditionally handled by the FHWA. Enacted as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users in 2005 and later expanded, the program aims to reduce delays in highway project delivery by letting states manage processes like environmental impact assessments. As of 2025, several states including California, Texas, Ohio, Florida, Utah, Alaska, and Arizona have successfully entered the program, demonstrating its potential to cut review times by up to 50 percent in some cases, according to FHWA reports.
MaineDOT's application builds on this framework, seeking to assume NEPA responsibilities for most federal-aid highway projects within the state. The initiative aligns with broader federal efforts to streamline infrastructure development, as seen in initiatives like the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2015 and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, which emphasized efficiency in environmental reviews without compromising protections.
Key Elements of the Proposed Memorandum of Understanding
The draft MOU specifies that FHWA would assign MaineDOT the authority to make project-level NEPA decisions for highway projects funded under Title 23 or requiring FHWA approval, excluding certain categories such as projects crossing state or international borders, those under 23 U.S.C. 202, 203, or 204 (unless designed and built by MaineDOT), recreational trails under 23 U.S.C. 206, and projects by direct federal-aid recipients other than MaineDOT.
Under the agreement, MaineDOT would handle environmental reviews, consultations, and actions under a wide array of federal laws. These include the Clean Air Act (excluding project-level conformity), Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Clean Water Act sections like 404 permits, and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, which protects parks and historic sites. Notably, the MOU excludes government-to-government consultations with federally recognized Indian tribes, which remain with FHWA, though MaineDOT would manage routine tribal consultations.
The document also requires MaineDOT to include a conspicuous disclosure on all environmental analyses, stating: 'The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by MaineDOT pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding and executed by FHWA and MaineDOT.' This ensures transparency and informs the public of the shifted responsibilities.
Involved Parties and Oversight Mechanisms
Key players include the FHWA, acting on behalf of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and MaineDOT, the state agency responsible for transportation infrastructure. FHWA's Maine Division Office, led by contacts like Henry Rettinger, will oversee the program's implementation, while MaineDOT's David Gardner serves as the state point of contact.
Oversight remains a critical component. The FHWA retains authority for certain determinations, such as constructive use under Section 4(f), requiring MaineDOT to consult and obtain FHWA approval. The MOU does not assign responsibilities for air quality conformity under the Clean Air Act or metropolitan transportation planning under 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135. This setup mirrors arrangements in other states, where FHWA conducts periodic audits to ensure compliance, as mandated by 23 U.S.C. 327.
The proposal complements MaineDOT's existing Section 326 MOU, signed on October 9, 2024, which allows the state to handle categorical exclusions—a subset of NEPA reviews. Together, these agreements could cover a broader range of projects, potentially accelerating timelines for initiatives like bridge replacements or road expansions.
Potential Implications and Perspectives
Short-term implications include faster project approvals, which could benefit Maine's economy by addressing aging infrastructure needs. For instance, Maine faces challenges with rural road maintenance and coastal resilience, where streamlined reviews might enable quicker responses to climate impacts. However, environmental groups may express concerns about reduced federal oversight, arguing it could lead to overlooked impacts on sensitive habitats, as seen in debates during California's early adoption of the program.
Long-term, successful implementation could set a precedent for other New England states, fostering regional consistency in transportation planning. Proponents, including industry associations like the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, view it as a way to cut bureaucratic red tape. Critics, such as those from the Sierra Club, emphasize the need for robust state capacity to handle complex consultations, citing past cases where states faced legal challenges over inadequate reviews.
Different perspectives highlight a balance: state officials praise the efficiency gains, while federal advocates stress the importance of maintaining environmental standards. Legal precedents, like the 2018 court ruling in Center for Biological Diversity v. FHWA upholding California's program, suggest that well-structured MOUs can withstand scrutiny if they include strong oversight.
In conclusion, MaineDOT's application represents a strategic effort to enhance project delivery efficiency under federal environmental laws. Key takeaways include the proposed delegation of NEPA duties for most in-state highway projects, with exclusions for border-crossing and tribal consultations. Potential next steps involve FHWA reviewing public comments by December 3, 2025, possibly revising the MOU, and finalizing the agreement. Ongoing debates may center on ensuring MaineDOT's resources match the new responsibilities, addressing capacity challenges, and monitoring environmental outcomes through FHWA audits. This development underscores the evolving federal-state partnership in infrastructure, with opportunities for streamlined processes amid calls for vigilant protection of natural and cultural resources.