Environmental Impact Statement Process Research Articles

Environmental impact assessments should include rigorous scientific peer review

Twenty USA states or jurisdictions and 125 nations have modeled national environmental policies after the National Environmental Policy Act. That act mandates that federal agencies initiate environmental impact statements (EISs) when substantive environmental or human health consequences are likely because of an agency action related to proposed development projects. The science used to inform the EIS process, however, does not require independent scientific peer review (ISPR) in the USA or most other nations. But ISPR is needed for governments to accurately inform the EIS decision-making and public reporting processes. Instead, science is routinely manipulated during EIS reviews to generate expedient project outcomes with substantially negative ecological, political, and long-term economic consequences. We provide four examples of EISs that lack ISPR, as well as four examples where reviews by independent scientists were helpful to improve agency decisions. We also recommend that independent scientists (no affiliation with the project proponents or agencies overseeing projects) be used to help assess potential environmental and socio-economic impacts, as well as offer appropriate risk assessments, study designs, and monitoring timeframes. We conclude that nations should convene formal reviews using independent scientists as a form of peer review in the EIS process.

Un-Repeal: Reviving the Arms Control Impact Statements

From the late 1970s into the early 1990s, U.S. federal law mandated the executive branch to prepare annual analytical documents known as Arms Control Impact Statements (ACIS). These instruments – obviously patterned after the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), which had been inaugurated only a few years previously – were intended to prod the national security community to undertake more rigorous, multi-dimensional study of major weapons programs, and to provide Congress and the American public with enhanced, timely information about key arms procurement decisions. However, unlike the EIS process – which rapidly became institutionalized, and which has proliferated to multiple tiers of government and around the world over the past fifty years – the ACIS process was a conspicuous failure. It was widely regarded as a meaningless exercise, consuming immense bureaucratic resources and hardly ever changing any outcomes – a colossal waste of time. The statute that created the ACIS operation was amended to abolish the entire program after only a decade and half of fitful operation. This Article undertakes to compare the starkly different case histories of the ACIS and EIS programs, with an eye to revival of the former in an appropriately modified form. It analyzes the goals of the legislation and the key features accounting for success and failure, and makes recommendations for a modern revival of ACIS that are based upon lessons learned in other contexts. The proposal seeks to underscore the concept that arms control is a key element in sound national security policy, to promote more systematic, wide-ranging analysis in support of key national decision-making, and to empower the legislative branch, as well as the public, to participate in policy debates in a more informed, timely manner.

Community groups score against Formosa in St. James Parish, Louisiana

The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) announced earlier this month that it will require an environmental impact statement (EIS), involving a full environmental review, for the $9.4 billion plastics plant that Formosa Plastics has proposed building in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The decision is being hailed as a victory by community and environmental groups opposed to the plant. The announcement follows the USACE’s decision last November to suspend a permit issued in 2019 for construction of the plant as a result of concerns that alternate sites for the project hadn’t been considered because of inaccurate information. The USACE said at the time that it would reexamine other aspects of the permit. “As a result of information received to date and my commitment for the Army to be a leader in the federal government’s efforts to ensure thorough environmental analysis and meaningful community outreach, I conclude an EIS process is

Participation or frustration? Local stakeholders and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): Donlin gold project, Western Alaska

This paper examines the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) at the Donlin Gold project in Western Alaska. The Donlin Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was led by the Army Corps of Engineers to inform federal agency decisions about the issuance of permits including a Section 404 Clean Water Act Permit and a Section 10 Rivers and Harbors Act Permit. As is required by the law, the EIS also investigated and disclosed many environmental impacts that were beyond the scope of the federal permits. The Donlin EIS was widely viewed as more detailed than most other EISs. The EIS process also included local tribal governments as cooperating agencies. Despite the EIS's detail and stakeholders’ increased role, many stakeholders felt that these efforts were insufficient. Stakeholders expressed frustration with the NEPA process and the regulators who implemented it. They reported that they felt patronized by a bureaucratic process that focused on fitting stakeholder concerns into technical and scientific disciplines for analysis by outside experts. This study concludes that augmenting the quantity of scientific study, even in response to the concerns of stakeholders, is unlikely to increase local stakeholders’ satisfaction with NEPA. Rather, regulatory personnel must focus on building trust between their agencies and local communities through 1) direct engagement with local stakeholders beyond the one-way forum of public meetings and 2) transparent dialog early in the NEPA process about the law's limitations with respect to turning stakeholders’ concerns into enforceable project requirements.

Un-repeal: Reviving the Arms Control Impact Statements

From the late 1970s into the early 1990s, U.S. federal law mandated the executive branch to prepare annual analytical documents known as Arms Control Impact Statements (ACIS). These instruments – obviously patterned after the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), which had been inaugurated only a few years previously – were intended to prod the national security community to undertake more rigorous, multi-dimensional study of major weapons programs, and to provide Congress and the American public with enhanced information about key arms procurement decisions. However, unlike the EIS process – which rapidly became institutionalized, and which has proliferated to multiple tiers of government and around the world over the past fifty years – the ACIS process was a conspicuous failure. It was widely regarded as a meaningless exercise, consuming immense bureaucratic resources and hardly ever changing any outcomes – a colossal waste of time. The statute that had created the ACIS operation was amended to abolish the entire program after only a decade and half of fitful operation. This Article undertakes to compare the starkly different case histories of the ACIS and EIS programs, with an eye to revival of the former, in appropriately modified form. It analyzes the goals of the legislation and the key features accounting for success and failure, and makes recommendations for a modern revival of ACIS, based upon lessons learned in other contexts. The proposal seeks to underscore the concept that arms control is a key element in sound national security policy, to promote more systematic, wide-ranging analysis in support of key national decision-making, and to empower the legislative branch, as well as the public, to participate in policy debates in a more informed, timely manner.

Finding Fault with the Nexus Pipeline? Agency Capture and the Public Good

Natural gas is an increasingly vital U.S. energy source that is presently being tapped and transported across state and international boundaries. Controversy engulfs natural gas, from the hydraulic fracturing process used to liberate it from massive, gas-laden Appalachian shale deposits, to the permitting and construction of new interstate pipelines bringing it to markets. This case explores the controversy flowing from the proposed 256-mile-long interstate Nexus pipeline transecting northern Ohio, southeastern Michigan and terminating at the Dawn Hub in Ontario, Canada. As the lead agency regulating and permitting interstate pipelines, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is also tasked with mitigating environmental risks through the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act's Environmental Impact Statement process. Pipeline opponents assert that a captured federal agency ignores public and scientific input, inadequately addresses public health and safety risks, preempts local control, and wields eminent domain powers at the expense of landowners, cities, and everyone in the pipeline path. Proponents counter that pipelines are the safest means of transporting domestically abundant, cleaner burning, affordable gas to markets that will boost local and regional economies and serve the public good. Debates over what constitutes the public good are only one set in a long list of contentious issues including pipeline safety, proposed routes, property rights, public voice, and questions over the scientific and democratic validity of the Environmental Impact Statement process. The Nexus pipeline provides a sobering example that simple energy policy solutions and compromise are elusive—effectively fueling greater conflict as the natural gas industry booms.

Build Airport Capacity or Manage Flight Demand? How Regional Planners Can Lead American Aviation Into a New Frontier of Demand Management

Problem, research strategy, and findings: To address air traffic congestion, airports can manage flight demand or expand capacity; the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires an environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate feasible alternatives to capacity expansion. The FAA also funds regional planning agencies to conduct optional regional aviation systems plans (RASPs). We study the extent to which airports investigate demand management in lieu of increasing capacity and if RASPs play a role in doing so. Of the 17 EISs for major airport capacity expansions between 2000 and 2013, only Boston (BOS), as influenced by the local RASP, fully assessed demand management. We find three barriers to airports evaluating demand management in their EISs: narrow project objectives, uncertainty over the FAA's stand on demand management, and economic development concerns. RASPs can help surmount these barriers because they are not constrained by the EIS's narrow objectives and can comprehensively evaluate demand management alternatives.Takeaway for practice: Demand management in aviation, as in surface transportation, holds potential for cost and other savings. Strengthening the role of regional planners in the airport planning process would lead to greater consideration of demand management and may bring innovative solutions to airport congestion. We recommend: a) the FAA play a more direct role in funding regional aviation planning and creating regional aviation planning coalitions; b) regional planners collaborate early in the airport EIS process; and c) planners encourage the FAA to make demand management a mandatory alternative in an EIS for airport capacity expansion.

Techno-Social Energy Infrastructure Siting: Sustainable Energy Modeling Programming (SEMPro)

Technical, environment, social, economic and political constraints are critical barriers to the development of new renewable energy supplies. SEMPro is an agent-based, predictive analytics model of energy siting policy in the techno-social space that simulates how competing interests shape siting outcomes to identify beneficial policy for sustainable energy infrastructure. Using a high voltage transmission line as a case study, we integrate project engineering and institutional factors with GIS data on land use attributes and US Census residential demographics. We focus on modeling citizen attitudinal, Community Based Organization (CBO) emergence and behavioral diffusion of support and opposition with Bilateral Shapley Values from cooperative game theory. We also simulate the competitive policy process and interaction between citizens, CBOs and regulatory, utility and governmental stakeholders using non-cooperative game theory. We find CBO formation, utility message and NGO messaging have a positive impact on citizen comments submitted as a part of the Environmental Impact Statement process, while project need and procedure have a negative impact. As citizens communicate and exchange political opinions across greater distances with more neighbors, less CBOs form but those that do are more effective, increasing the number of messages citizens send.

Health Impact Assessment

FOR THE PAST 4 DECADES, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMpact statement (EIS) process has been used to assess the environmental effects of major projects and policies that involve federal funds, such as designing highways, altering waterways, extracting resources on federal lands, and setting Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. Created under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, EISs do not determine policy but rather ensure that stakeholders have full information about unintended environmental impacts before reaching a decision. By evaluating alternative proposals and their relative risks and benefits, an EIS helps decision makers choose options that promote favorable outcomes and mitigate adverse environmental consequences. A natural extension of this work is the use of health impact assessment (HIA) to examine the effects that a policy, program, or project may have on the health of a population. An HIA is defined as “a combination of procedures, methods and tools that systematically judges the potential, and sometimes unintended, effects of a policy, plan, programme or project on the health of a population and the distribution of those effects within the population. HIA identifies appropriate actions to manage those effects.” Most health professionals are probably more familiar with EISs and their intent and usage than with HIAs. Yet there has been a movement to adopt HIAs in public policy settings and legislation and in a recently emerging health policy literature that describes and advocates for this process. HIAs offer great potential for promoting health by encouraging decisions that protect and enhance health and health equity. There is increasing recognition that many contemporary health issues are profoundly influenced by factors outside the traditional realm of health and health care. Factors such as literacy, poverty, employment, and racism contribute to disparities in life expectancy as well as to health-related quality of life. Concerns about how to address these factors have led to a focus on “health in all policies,” in which policies in social sectors such as transportation, housing, employment, and agriculture ideally would contribute to health and health equity. An HIA offers a vehicle to make these health effects explicit. Unfortunately, the evaluation of health effects in policy making has been slow to take hold. The United States lags behind many European nations, Canada, and other countries in the use of HIAs. This situation is somewhat surprising, given that US environmental policy explicitly requires the examination of health effects as part of the National Environmental Policy Act. Although most EISs in the United States incorporate little about health effects, experience in California and Alaska has demonstrated that a wide range of health effects can be successfully integrated into the EIS process. Beyond increasing attention to health outcomes within EISs, the potential applications of HIAs are clearly evident. For example, although air pollution and injury prevention are often considered in major transportation projects, the influence of road design on physical activity and obesity is not. An HIA that recommends the addition of pedestrian and bicycle facilities (“complete streets”) to a transportation plan would contribute to a built environment that promotes the public’s health. The agriculture sector seeks to maximize productivity, meet consumer demand, and sustain livelihoods. From a health perspective, agricultural policy determines food quantity, quality, and prices that directly affect consumption patterns and therefore affect health. HIAs could be used to examine the health effects of proposed agricultural policies, such as ones that enhance production of energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods that contribute to the increasing obesity epidemic. HIAs of proposed zoning plans, which would contribute to decreased density of fast-food and liquor stores or increased density of restaurants and full-service grocery stores, especially in low-income areas, could result in changes that better promote health. In education, a timely HIA might have reduced the inadvertent effects of the No Child Left Behind legislation on physical education programs and health curricula by pro-

Engineering and Regulatory Challenges Facing the Development of Commercially Viable Offshore Wind Projects

Cape Wind is a proposal to locate America's first offshore wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts to generate renewable energy. First proposed in 2001, Cape Wind has faced numerous engineering and regulatory challenges. Great care was taken in the site selection process to ensure a technically and economically viable project that would generate wind energy on a utility scale. The regulatory environment and permitting process for Cape Wind has always been extensive and comprehensive, comprised of federal, state and local agencies. As a result of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the lead federal permitting agency changed from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) to the Minerals Management Service (MMS), which resulted in a significant delay in the permitting schedule. Throughout the Environmental Impact Statement process with the ACOE and the MMS, numerous engineering and scientific studies have been performed on a wide host of environmental and economic issues. MMS issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in January, 2008. MMS officials have stated they expect to issue the Final Environmental Impact Statement in fall, 2008 and to issue a Record of Decision on Cape Wind thirty days later.

Inupiat Health and Proposed Alaskan Oil Development: Results of the First Integrated Health Impact Assessment/Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Oil Development on Alaska’s North Slope

We report on the first Health Impact Assessment (HIA) for proposed oil and gas development in Alaska’s North Slope region. Public health is not generally analyzed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process in the U.S. We conducted an HIA for proposed oil development within the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska in response to growing concerns among North Slope Inupiat communities regarding the potential impacts of regional industrial expansion on their health and culture. We employed a qualitative HIA methodology, involving a combination of stakeholder input, literature review, and qualitative analysis, through which we identified potential health effects. The possible health outcomes identified include increases in diabetes and related metabolic conditions as a result of dietary change; rising rates of substance abuse, domestic violence, and suicide; increased injury rates; more frequent asthma exacerbations; and increased exposure to organic pollutant, including carcinogens and endocrine disruptors. There are also potential benefits, including funding for infrastructure and health care; increased employment and income; and continued funding of existing infrastructure. Based on these findings, we recommend a series of public health mitigation measures. This project represents the first formal effort to include a systematic assessment of public health within the U.S. EIS process. The inclusion of public health concerns within an EIS may offer an important and underutilized avenue through which to argue for environmental management strategies that focus on public health, and may offer communities a stronger voice in the EIS process.

Mount stirling: Political and environmental convergence for sustainable development

The paper briefly reports the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process undertaken in 1994–1996 into the future of Mount Stirling in Victoria, Australia, which was targeted for development as an integrated ski resort. The EIA process was preceded by extreme controversy about the proposed use of the mountain for downhill skiing and the use of a legal injunction to stall the proposed development. It represents a rare example where government used the EIA process to find the best overall solution to a public policy issue. A consultative committee (including interest groups and community representatives) was involved in scoping the environmental impact statement (EIS), writing the study brief, selecting a consultant, and guiding the preparation of the EIS. A framework for evaluating alternatives based on sustainable development principles was developed during preparation of the EIS. A number of alternatives, ranging from “no development” to a comprehensive ski resort and village, were generated; and natural, social and economic data were integrated in the analysis of alternatives. An independent panel was appointed to hear submissions on all alternatives and to recommend the best solution to government. The case study reinforced two key premises. First, it underscored the value of undertaking a strategic assessment that incorporated a wide range of alternatives, and integrated technical, environmental, social and economic information in the EIS and decision-making process. Second, it demonstrates that environmental dispute resolution can be achieved through a focus on the requirements of distributive, procedural, and relational justice.

Rethinking American Public Policy: The Environment, Federalism, States, and Supranational Influences

The politics of American public policy recently have transformed in response to changing power relationships between levels of government in the United States. Certain policy choices now are made in different arenas–for example, state and local government institutions often make policy decisions that previously had been within the jurisdiction of America's national government. At the same time, new policy relationships between states also are altering previous political patterns. This article highlights and explains this phenomenon, and focuses particularly on the changing power relationships between levels of government in the United States–national, state, and local–and the resulting policies and politics. More specifically, it closely examines two 20th century innovations in government and public policymaking within the context of a discrete case study. One of these innovations is institutional–the rise of public authorities or public corporations as highly insulated, governmental entities. The other is procedural–the environmental impact statement process. Together, these innovations, in concert with broader international and global trends, have played a large role in the shifting power structure and politics underlying American public policymaking activities.

Communicating with citizens: The power of photosimulations and simple editing

There is considerable evidence that Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) may be failing in one of their chief aims—communicating information about proposed environmental changes to citizens. This paper proposes and tests two relatively simple techniques for making EISs accessible to members of the general public. We presented three versions of the project description portion of an EIS for flood control measures on the Hickory Creek in Joliet, Illinois, US, to 373 Joliet citizens. After reading the materials, each citizen answered a number of questions about the proposed project and its environmental consequences. The original project description yielded almost no understanding, but the two modifications had consistently positive and substantial effects on understanding. These findings, in combination with the low cost of the techniques, offer considerable hope for more effective public participation in the EIS process, and therefore, more viable public projects.

Federal environmental impact statements as an important source of information

This article examines the background and characteristics of environmental impact statements (EIS), prepared by Federal agencies in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and discusses the sources that provide bibliographic control for EISs. In order to encourage awareness of the studies, the article explores their usefulness beyond their original function, outlines the legislative basis for EISs, describes the EIS process and format, and identifies government and private sector sources that facilitate access to them. A table listing the sources suggests alternatives for locating and acquiring the studies.

The role of data in the EIS process: Evidence from the BLM wilderness review

Various propositions have been offered about the role of the environmental impact statement (EIS) in agency decision making. These include statements that agencies are (1) using the information collected in the EIS to make rational decisions; (2) justifying decisions made a priori; (3) using the EIS to gain support or consensus for projects; or (4) simply fulfilling a legal mandate, with the EIS having no substantive impact on decisions. Previous studies regarding the role of EIS data have focused on the quality of the data in the EIS and whether or not the data are related to decisions. The role of site-specific information in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wilderness EIS process is analyzed and the results are used to reflect on the impact of the EIS in agency decision making. These results are compared with an earlier analysis of the Forest Service's Second Roadless Area Review and Evaluation (RARE II). The results of the statistical analyses of three sets of BLM wilderness EISs indicate that although some of the site-specific information about resource potential is statistically related to agency wilderness recommendations, the vast majority of the information is not. In addition, in some cases, the information was related to wilderness recommendations in a counterintuitive direction. Overall, of the 190 measures of resource potential found in these documents, only 17 (9%) were statistically related to BLM recommendations in an intuitive direction. The fact that most of the information in these EISs is not statistically related to decisions lends support to the proposition that the agency was primarily fulfilling the legally mandated procedure of the National Environmental Policy Act in producing these EISs, rather than achieving the spirit of the law. Results from the analysis of the Forest Service's RARE II wilderness review are similar. Although these analyses may provide support for proposals to improve the EIS through shortening of the documents, more research is needed before it can be assumed that shorter EISs will ensure a link between the remaining information and agency decisions.

Environment and industrialization in Puerto Rico: disenfranchising the people

Abstract This paper explores the effects of industrialization policy on environmental regulation in Puerto Rico, focusing on implementation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) review process. Adopted in 1970, the EIS process has been transformed to pave the way for extensive use of a concise, alternative mechanism for analysing project environmental impacts, one with less opportunity for public input. This policy shift, virtually replacing the full‐scale EIS, occurred as a way to mediate the conflict between environmental policy and industrialization policy. Formal public participation in environmental decision‐making became the target of reform by the Puerto Rican Government because it perceived that public review was interfering with the location of industry.

Of measured risks: The environmental impacts of the Prudhoe Bay, alaska, oil field

AbstractThe 20th anniversary of the filing of the Trans‐Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) affords an opportunity to assess retrospectively the environmental impacts of the resultant North Slope oil fields, now the largest single source of U.S. domestic oil production. As the oil field expanded, particularly to near‐shore areas such as the Endicott Development, additional EIS documents were prepared to assess impacts not included in the original TAPS EIS. In the ensuing years, numerous agency‐monitored and industry‐sponsored environmental monitoring studies, estimated to average $4 million per year, have been conducted in and around the oil field, making the Alaskan North Slope one of the most studied environments in North America.In this paper, the EIS requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is examined as a predictive environmental risk assessment. A tabulated summary of the predicted environmental impacts from the original TAPS and offshore Endicott Development EIS documents is compared with the extensive amount of resultant monitoring data. These data confirm localized impacts to air and water quality; however, regulated discharges remain well below criteria established for the protection of human health and the environment. As predicted, some unavoidable habitat losses to resident and migratory wildlife have occurred within the oil field and pipeline corridors. Approximately 2% of the land surface in developed portions of the oil field was actually altered. However, careful monitoring of wildlife populations demonstrates that no species has experienced a measurable decline, and most continue to utilize oil field habitat for breeding, nesting, and summer forage. As habitat does not appear to be limiting the growth of North Slope caribou herds, the Central Arctic Herd has been able to accommodate the incremental habitat loss due to the oil field and has shown a sevenfold increase in numbers since the oil field development began in the early 1970s. Offshore monitoring data for the gravel causeways verify the predicted small, localized effects on water circulation and show the possibility is low that fish are experiencing resulting significant negative effects.The challenge faced in the EIS process is not how to ensure zero impact, as this is not a realistic goal, but instead it is how to predict impacts and describe mitigation measures accurately to ensure that the resultant ecological responses remain within a normal range of ecosystem oscillations that can be used to describe sustainable development. This review demonstrates that in the EIS process, a well‐designed program using the best available field data can indeed provide a relatively accurate prediction of subsequent impacts.

Adapting the Environmental Impact Statement Process to Inform Decisionmakers

The environmental impact statement (EIS) process is central to the assessment of environmentally significant actions. Yet decisions about what matters in the environment and what gets studied as part of an EIS are based on values that are largely implicit and come primarily from technical experts. In this article we propose using the techniques of decision analysis (DA) to articulate values explicitly and make the EIS process more effective as an aid to decisionmakers in developing defensible environmental policies. We identify five major sources of problems with the current EIS approach, propose a new environmental decision process that incorporates DA in the EIS framework, and consider the merits, problems, and feasibility of implementing the suggested policy improvements.

Injunctions for NEPA Violations: Balancing the Equities

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) reads like no other environmental statute. Its language is lofty and aspirational. Section 101 proclaims a national environmental policy create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans.' It declares that the federal government has a continuing responsibility to act as trustee for future generations, and to assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings.2 NEPA's actual requirements, however, are significantly less grand. The heart of NEPA's scheme, ? 102, requires that federal agencies analyze the environmental effects of all major actions in a detailed environmental impact statement (EIS).3 NEPA has detailed paperwork requirements but no specific substantive requirements. Once the agency completes the EIS process, it may proceed with any course of action, environmentally harmful or not. This gap between the vague, aspirational goals of ? 101 and the EIS paper process of ? 102 has left courts with a difficult remedial problem. Vhat should they do when a federal agency fails to follow the prescribed procedures? Specifically, how should a court decide whether to enjoin a federal project when the agency has not thoroughly considered the project's environmental effects as NEPA requires? An example will illustrate the problem. Imagine that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is planning to install a new electricity generating system at a dam. The system would use a new technique, pumped storage, that involves the pumping of water upstream during peak demand periods. The Corps has already pre-