In April 2026, the Council on Environmental Quality issued new categorical exclusion guidance on how federal agencies should establish, revise, adopt, and apply Categorical Exclusions under NEPA. the categorical exclusion guidance signals a clear policy shift: when in doubt, use a Categorical Exclusion.
For anyone working on federally funded projects, this is worth understanding. More projects qualifying for Categorical Exclusions means faster environmental review and no EA or EIS required.
Here’s what the categorical exclusion guidance does, what it changes, and what it means for your project.
Quick Recap: What Is a Categorical Exclusion?
A Categorical Exclusion (CE) is a category of actions that federal agencies have determined do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the environment. Projects that qualify for a CE skip the Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Statement process entirely.
Categorical Exclusions are the fastest path through NEPA. Most routine infrastructure projects resurfacing a road, replacing a culvert, installing pedestrian signals qualify for a CE. If your project qualifies, NEPA compliance can be completed in weeks rather than months or years.
For a full breakdown of how CEs compare to EAs and EISs, see What Is the Difference Between a CE, EA, and EIS?
What Did CEQ Issue in April 2026?
On April 9, 2026, CEQ released guidance titled “Establishing, Revising, Adopting, and Applying Categorical Exclusions.” You can find the Federal Register notice here and the full guidance at nepa.gov.
This guidance replaces the December 2010 guidance on the same subject. It reflects two major changes that happened since 2010:
- The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which made the first substantive amendments to NEPA since the law was enacted in 1970. The FRA set new timeline requirements for EAs and EISs, narrowed the scope of required environmental review to “reasonably foreseeable” effects, and tightened the definition of what qualifies as a major federal action.
- CEQ’s own removal of its NEPA implementing regulations in January 2026
The new guidance tells agencies how to operate in an environment where both the statute and the regulatory framework have been significantly revised.
The CE First Approach
The headline policy shift in this categorical exclusion guidance is what CEQ calls a “CE first” approach.
Under this approach, agencies are directed to consider whether a Categorical Exclusion applies before defaulting to an EA or EIS. The idea is that agencies should not be doing full environmental reviews for projects that clearly qualify for a CE. Start with the CE, not the full document.
This is a departure from how some agencies have operated. In practice, agencies sometimes defaulted to EAs out of caution even when a Categorical Exclusion was arguably sufficient. The new guidance pushes back against that.
For practitioners: The CE-first directive has real implications for how agencies document their decisions. If an agency skips a CE and goes straight to an EA, they may now need to explain why. That is a subtle but important shift in the burden of justification. It also creates a potential litigation angle: project opponents could argue an agency failed to properly consider a Categorical Exclusion before initiating a more burdensome review. How courts treat that argument — under guidance that is not a binding regulation — is an open question.
What the Guidance Allows Agencies to Do
The April 2026 guidance gives agencies Athree main tools they did not have as clearly before:
Establish new CEs. Agencies can create new CE categories for project types that come up repeatedly in their programs. If a project type consistently causes no significant environmental impact, agencies can establish a CE for it rather than doing case by case review every time.
Revise existing CEs. Agencies can update their existing CEs to reflect current conditions, updated science, or changed program needs.
Adopt CEs from other agencies. This is new and significant. An agency can now adopt a Categorical Exclusion that another agency has already established. If the Army Corps of Engineers has a CE for a type of work that also comes up in an FHWA project, FHWA could potentially adopt that CE rather than creating its own. This reduces duplication across agencies.
All three provisions of this categorical exclusion guidance are detailed in the full guidance document (PDF).
Cross-agency adoption, explained: Here is a concrete example of why this matters. The Army Corps of Engineers has established CEs for certain types of dredging and fill work. If FHWA encounters a transportation project that involves similar work and the Corps CE fits, FHWA could potentially adopt that CE rather than building a new one. This reduces duplication, speeds up rulemaking, and extends CE coverage to project types that might have previously required an EA. In practice, cross-agency adoption requires the adopting agency to verify the CE fits its own program and legal authorities — but the pathway is now clearly established.
What Does This Mean for Transportation Projects?
For federally funded transportation projects, the CE process is already well established through FHWA’s regulations at 23 CFR 771.117. Those regulations list specific CE categories at 771.117(c) and (d), and they were not changed by this guidance.
What the April 2026 categorical exclusion guidance does is create pressure for FHWA to potentially expand its CE list over time, consistent with the CE first approach. It also gives FHWA a cleaner process for adopting CEs from other agencies if relevant.
For now, if you work on local agency transportation projects, your CE determination process has not changed. You still use 23 CFR 771.117 and the categorical exclusion guidance checklist process your district requires.
New Technology Tools
Along with the categorical exclusion guidance, CEQ launched two technology tools:
Categorical Exclusion Explorer An online searchable database of existing CEs across all federal agencies. If you want to know whether a particular type of project has an established CE somewhere in the federal government, this is the place to look.
CE Works – A technology platform that digitizes the process of completing a CE determination. Still in pilot phase.
Both tools are available through nepa.gov.
A Note on What This Guidance Is (and Isn’t)
This point is worth understanding clearly, especially for practitioners.
The April 2026 guidance is not a regulation. CEQ removed its binding NEPA implementing regulations in January 2026. What replaced them — including this document — is guidance. Agencies are directed to follow it, but it operates differently than the old 40 CFR 1500-1508 rules.
In practical terms: a regulation carries the force of law and can be enforced in court as a binding standard. Guidance tells agencies how the issuing authority interprets the statute and expects agencies to act, but courts generally give it less deference. Agencies that deviate from guidance are not automatically in violation of NEPA — but they may face scrutiny if their process looks inconsistent with the policy direction CEQ has set.
For beginners: Think of the difference between a law and a policy memo. Both matter. But one is legally enforceable and one is strong direction. This guidance is strong direction.
For practitioners: The non-binding nature raises real questions about enforceability and judicial review. If a project opponent challenges an agency’s failure to follow the CE-first approach, courts will have to decide how much weight this guidance carries. That litigation has not happened yet, and the answer is not settled.
What to Watch
The April 2026 categorical exclusion guidance sets a direction, but several questions remain open:
Will agencies actually expand their Categorical Exclusion lists? The guidance creates the tools and the mandate, but agencies still have to do the work of establishing or revising CEs through rulemaking. That takes time. Watch for FHWA, FTA, and other transportation agencies to issue proposed CE updates in the coming months or years.
How will courts treat the CE-first requirement? Because the guidance is non-binding, its legal weight in litigation is uncertain. The first major challenge involving the CE-first approach will clarify a lot.
What happens to public involvement? CEs do not require the same level of public notice and comment that EAs and EISs do. A broader CE umbrella means more projects moving through NEPA with less public visibility. That tradeoff is built into the policy direction, but it is likely to generate pushback from environmental advocates and potentially Congress.
Cross-agency adoption in practice. No agency has publicly announced a CE adoption under this new guidance yet. The first real-world examples will show how much verification is required and how smoothly the process works.
FAQ
Does this guidance change the CE process for my FHWA funded project?
Not directly. FHWA’s CE categories are set by 23 CFR 771.117, which was not changed by this guidance. Your existing CE determination process still applies. The guidance may lead FHWA to expand or update its CE list over time, but that has not happened yet.
What is the CE first approach in plain language?
It means agencies should check whether a CE applies before assuming they need a full EA or EIS. If a CE fits, use it. Don’t do more environmental review than the project requires.
Can agencies now create a CE for anything?
No. A CE still requires a determination that the category of actions does not individually or cumulatively have significant environmental effects. Agencies cannot establish a CE for a project type that has significant impacts. Unusual circumstances can also prevent a CE from applying to an otherwise CE eligible project.
What happened to CEQ’s authority to issue this guidance?
CEQ removed its binding NEPA implementing regulations in January 2026. This April guidance is not a binding regulation it is guidance. Agencies are directed to follow it, but it operates differently than the old 40 CFR 1500-1508 rules. For more background on the regulation removal, see What Happened to CEQ’s NEPA Regulations?
Where can I find the full guidance?
The Federal Register notice is here: Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act Guidance. For the complete text including all provisions on establishing, revising, and adopting CEs, refer to the full guidance document (PDF). Both are also available through nepa.gov.
The Bottom Line
The April 2026 categorical exclusion guidance is part of a broader push to streamline NEPA review by expanding and normalizing Categorical Exclusion use. The CE-first approach, the ability to adopt CEs across agencies, and the new technology tools all point in the same direction: fewer full environmental reviews, faster project delivery.
For transportation practitioners, the immediate impact is limited because FHWA’s CE process is already established. But the direction of travel is clear. Expect the CE list to grow and expect agencies to apply CEs more aggressively in the years ahead.
The open questions — how courts will treat non-binding guidance, whether agencies will actually expand their CE lists, and what the broader effect is on public involvement — will play out over the next few years. This post will be updated as those answers emerge.
Sources: CEQ CE Guidance, Federal Register April 13, 2026; White House CEQ CE Guidance Release, April 9, 2026
Photo by 2HMedia on Unsplash