Recognizing that centuries of mistreatment of low-income and minority communities by governments and corporations have resulted in widespread exposure to environmental harms, academics and policymakers are seeking ways to improve environmental justice. While it is commonly assumed that improved procedural justice (meaningful participation in decision making) should improve distributive justice (equitable distribution of environmental harms and benefits), empirical evidence of this link is nascent. This paper evaluates whether differing approaches to procedural justice shape recognition of distributive injustices by policymakers, focusing on implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in Puerto Rico. NEPA requires federal agencies to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of projects they implement, fund, or permit; this review commonly includes an assessment of the project's impacts on distributive justice. Drawing on document analysis and interviews with project developers, regulators, and community organizations, we explore how and why four NEPA reviews consider distributional impacts. In all four cases, the community mobilized to voice concerns about the proposed projects' impacts, but the lead agencies and project developers did not always create the space for those voices to collaboratively shape the review. This demonstrates the role of the project developer in how distributive justice considerations are treated, as project leads have discretion on whether and when to provide space for community groups to participate in the process. This research makes two primary contributions. First, by linking features of the decision-making process with environmental justice-related outputs, this research provides practical understanding of ways to support distributive justice and expands knowledge about how participatory governance works within the context of US environmental policy. Second, by studying NEPA's implementation in Puerto Rico, we assess challenges associated with implementing Environmental Impact Assessment in a territorial setting, where the demographics and intensity of environmental problems are distinct from the 'traditional' American context the policies were designed to protect.