When Should Preferred Alternatives Be Disclosed in Transportation Environmental Impact Statements?

Abstract

State transportation agencies, in an effort to show a lack of bias toward alternatives under consideration, often do not disclose their Preferred Alternative in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), even if they are inclined to prefer a particular choice at that stage. Typically, the Draft EIS is released for review, comments are received, a Preferred Alternative is designated, the Preferred Alternative is disclosed with release of the Final EIS (where the comments on the Draft EIS are also addressed), a 30-day review period follows, and then a Record of Decision is published. The public has sometimes criticized this process as shutting them out of decision making. This article discloses the findings of questionnaires given to transportation agency officials in various states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, reporting information on recent Draft and Final EISs for transportation projects. The objective was to determine what proportion of Draft EISs for transportation projects disclose the Preferred Alternative at that stage, and what proportion of projects allow the public to comment on a Final EIS and its Preferred Alternative determination. After identifying common trends, suggestions are made for improving the decision-making process in order to empower the public to be a full partner.