productive harmony A brief explanation of environmental impact statements U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 -------An error occurred while trying to OCR this image. How It Started On January 1, 1970, the President signed into law the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which declared a national policy to encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment. In signing the bill, the President remarked that it was particularly fitting as his first official act of the new decade not only because it gave disparate Federal environmental efforts organization and direction, but because, "the 1970's absolutely must be the years when America pays its debt to the past by reclaiming the purity of its air, its waters and our living environment. It is literally now or never." NEPA established in the Executive Office of the President a Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), charged with responsibility to study the condition of the Nation's environment, to develop new environmental programs and policies, to coordinate the wide array of Federal environmental efforts, to see that all Federal activities take environmental con- siderations into account and to assist the President in assessing environmental problems and in determining ways to solve them. To ensure that environmental amenities and values are given systematic consideration equal to economic and technical considerations in the Federal decision-making process, NEPA requires each Federal agency to prepare a statement of environmental impact in advance oj each major action, recommendation or report on legislation that may significantly affect the quality oj the human environment. Such actions may include new highway construction, harbor dredging or filling, nuclear power plant con- struction, large-scale aerial pesticide spraying, river channeling, new jet runways, munitions disposal, bridge construction and more. What is an Environmental Impact Statement? A environmental impact statement is the heart of a Federal administrative process designed to ensure achievement of national environmental goals. Each statement must assess in detail the potential environmental ------- " impact of a proposed action, and all Federal agencies are required to prepare statements for matters under their jurisdiction. As early in the decision-making process as possible, and in all cases prior to agency decision, an agency prepares a draft statement for review by appropriate Federal, State and local environmental agencies as well as the public. After comment from the agencies and interested parties, the statement is prepared in final form, incorporating all comments and objections received on the draft and indicating how significant issues raised during the commenting process have been resolved. Both draft and final statement are filed with CEQ and made available to the public. Impact statements are popularly called E.I.S.'s (Environmental Impact Statements). urpose of the Statement The statement's primary purpose is to disclose the environmental conse- quences of a proposed action, thus alerting the agency decision-maker, the public and ultimately Congress and the President to the environmental risks involved. An important and intended consequence of this is to build into a Federal agency's decision-making process a continuing consciousness of environ- mental considerations. This, in turn, ensures to the fullest extent possible that the agency directs its policies, plans and programs so as to meet national environmental goals. Vhat Actions Must Statements Cover? The actions for which agencies must prepare impact statements must be "major" and "environmentally significant," such as: 1. Agency recommendations on their own proposals for legislation. 2. Agency reports on legislation initiated elsewhere but concerning subject matter for which the agency has primary responsibility. 3. Projects and continuing activities which may be a. undertaken directly by an agency; b. supported in whole or in part through 1 ------- Federal contracts, grants, subsidies, loans or other forms of funding assistance; or c. part of a Federal lease, permit. license, certificate or other entitle- ment for use. 4. Decisions of policy, regulation and procedure-making. All of the following actions are considered major and/or environmentally significant. 1. Actions whose impact is significant and highly controversial on environmental grounds. 2. Actions which are precedents for much larger actions which may have consider- able environmental impact. 3. Actions which are decisions in principle about major future courses of action. 4. Actions which are major because of the involvement of several Federal agencies, even though a particular agency's indi- vidual action is not major. 5. Actions whose impact includes envi- ronmentally beneficial as well as envi- ronmentally detrimental effects. Contents of the Statement E ach environmental impact statement must include: 1. A detailed description of the proposed action including information and technical data adequate to permit a careful assessment of environmental impact. 2. Discussion of the probable impact on the environment, including any impact on ecological systems and any direct or indirect consequences that may result from the action. 3. Any adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided. 4. Alternatives to the proposed action that might avoid some or all of the adverse environmental effects, including analysis of costs and environmental impacts of these alternatives. 5. An assessment of the cumulative, long-term effects of the proposed action includ- ing its relationship to short-term use of the environment versus the environment's long-term productivity. ------- 6. Any irreversible or irretrievable commit- ment of resources that might result from the action or which would curtail beneficial use of the environment. A final impact statement must include a discussion of problems and objections raised by other Federal, State and local agencies, private organizations and individuals during the draft statement's review process. tat Does a Statement Look Like? Ai environmental impact statement varies in length according to the complexity of the proposed action under review. Each statement ordinarily is introduced by a summary sheet suggesting the nature of its contents; e.g.: Environmental Impact Statement Draft Final Name of responsible or principal agency and appropriate operating division. 1. Administrative action Legislative action 2. Brief description of action, indicating States and counties particularly affected. 3. Summary of environmental impact and adverse environmental affects. 4. List of alternatives considered. 5. For draft statement, a list of all Federal, State and local agencies from which comments have been requested. For final statement, a list of all Federal, State and local agencies and other sources from which written comments have been received. 6. Dates draft and final statements are filed with CEQ and made available to the public. len is a Statement Prepared? A raft statement must be prepared and circulated for comment at least 90 days before the proposed action. A final statement must be made public at least 30 days before the proposed action. Any agency unable to meet these requirements must consult with CEQ. Each agency must identify at what stage or stages in a series of actions relating to a particular matter, that an environmental impact statement will be prepared. Often it may ------- be necessary to write a statement both in the development of a national program and in the review of proposed projects within a national program. A duplicate clearance process is not always mandatory, but when actions being considered differ significantly from those that have been reviewed already, a new statement should be written. It is the responsibility of each agency to obtain views of other agencies and interested parties at the earliest feasible time in the devel- opment of program and project proposals. To the maximum extent practicable, impact statements must be prepared for continuing major Federal actions significantly affecting the environment even though they arise from projects or programs initiated prior to enact- ment of NEPA. Where it is not practicable, it is still important that further incremental actions be shaped to minimize adverse environmental consequences and to account for environmental consequences not fully evaluated at the outset of a project or program. The greatest use should be made of existing interagency and intergovernmental review procedures. How Does an Agency Prepare a Statement? NEPA directs each agency to establish procedures for dealing with environ- mental impact statements, those pre- pared inhouse and those reviewed for comment. Agency procedures must: 1. Identify those agency actions requiring environmental statements. 2. Designate the appropriate time prior to decision to seek comments of other agencies. 3. Describe the mechanisms through which statements are to be made available to the public. 4. Specify general methods for obtaining information required in the preparation of a statement. 5. Designate officials responsible for statements. 6. Establish patterns for consulting with and taking into account the comments of'other agencies, particularly EPA. 7. Provide for timely public announcement ------- of plans and programs with environmental impact. NEPA goes a step beyond requiring new actions to be environmentally sound by directing all Federal agencies to review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance with the Act. Still further, agencies must propose "such measures as may be necessary to bring their authority and policies into conformity with the intent, purposes and procedures set forth in this Act." In other words, agencies must not only begin to meet NEPA requirements for decisions yet unmade, but must seek to realign their standard operating procedures with national environmental goals. Vho Reviews Each Statement? NEPA requires each Federal agency to "consult with and obtain the comments of any other agency (including State and local as well as Federal) which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved" in an impact statement. In its guidelines for preparing statements, CEQ lists the agencies which must be con- sulted on this basis in the following areas: • air quality and air pollution control • weather modification • environmental aspects of electric energy gener- ation and transmission • natural gas energy development, generation and transmission • toxic materials • pesticides • herbicides • transportation and handling of hazardous materials • coastal areas: wetlands, estuaries, waterfowl refuges and beaches • historic and archeological sites • flood plains and watersheds • mineral land reclamation ------- • parks, forests and outdoor recreational areas • soil and plant life, sedimentation, erosion and hydrologic conditions • noise control and abatement • chemical contamination of food products • food additives and food sanitation • microbiological contamination • radiation and radiological health • sanitation and waste systems • shellfish sanitation • transportation and air quality • transportation and water quality • congestion in urban areas, housing and building displacement • environmental effects with special impact on low-income neighborhoods • rodent control • urban planning • water quality and water pollution control • marine pollution • river and canal regulation and stream channelization • wildlife The guidelines also require draft statements to be made available for public comment. Many individual agency procedures allow for direct solicitation of such comments from interested parties and private organizations. If an agency is in doubt as to the proper recipients of its request for comments, CEQ will advise on an appropriate routing. The Role of CEQ CEQ is the central Federal force behind the impact statement process. CEQ as- sists other agencies whenever and wher - ever necessary in determining the applicability of NEPA to agency actions and in promulgating agency procedures to meet NEPA requirements. CEQ also assists in resolving any conflicts that may arise. The Council's role is a coordinating one; it is not a commenting agency in the sense that its comments are attached to impact state- ments. Thus no inference of either approval or disapproval is to be drawn from CEQ's failure to comment on either draft or final statements. ------- As long as a statement is made available to CEQ, that agency will be able to fulfill its role of internal adviser to the Executive Branch and to the President as contemplated by NEPA. CEQ's guidelines for preparing E.I.S.'s on proposed Federal actions affecting the en- vironment were issued Aug. 1, 1973 in the Federal Register. e Role of EPA EPA reviews environmental impact state- ments touching any aspect of its re- sponsibilities centering around air and water pollution, drinking water supplies, solid waste, pesticides, radiation and noise. In addition to reviewing statements filed by Federal agencies, EPA frequently reviews statements filed by States and other jurisdic- tions as a technical service. Periodically, EPA lists in the Federal Regis- ter statements it has reviewed and commented on, coding the nature of its comments. The code generally indicates endorsement of the proposed action, request for more information to determine environmental damage or objec- tion to the action on environmental grounds. EPA's obligation to review proposed Fed- erally supported actions extends beyond that of other agencies because of its role as the principal Federal regulator of pollution control matters. Under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, EPA must "review and comment in writing on the environmental impact" of any legislation, action or regulation proposed by any Federal agency if it affects matters related to EPA's jurisdiction. If EPA determines that any proposed activity is unsatisfactory from the standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality, that determination must be published and the matter referred to CEQ. EPA notifies the public of these comments in the same manner that notification is made of comments on impact statements. Generally, EPA has no authority to stop a project sponsored by another Federal agency; it acts only in an advisory capacity to other agencies, CEQ and the President. ------- Impact Statements and the Public The impact statement procedure affords the public an opportunity to participate in Federal decisions that may affect the human environment. Each draft statement must be made public by the responsible agency at the time it is circulated for com- ment, a date not less than 90 days before the proposed action. Comments must be made available also, and the final statement must include a discussion of the objections and problems raised in comments on the draft. The final statement must be made public at least 30 days prior to the proposed action. Statements are announced in the Federal Register, although many agencies have supplementary procedures to reach interested citizens. EPA, for example, generally notifies the press (1) when a decision is reached to issue an impact statement, (2) when a draft or final statement is prepared and (3) when comments on other agencies' statements are issued. Interested parties may view EPA's own impact statements or EPA's comments on the statements of other agencies by contacting EPA headquarters in Washington, B.C. or any of its ten regional offices. The agency welcomes public comment. EPA does not distribute impact statements prepared by other agencies. These are available directly from the agencies bearing primary responsibility. Interested people may submit comments to agencies on any impact statement issued by them. If an individual believes a drajt state- ment to be inadequate, he may offer written comments on the draft. If he believes the disposition of his comment in the final statement to be inadequate, he may so notify the agency involved and inform CEQ. In addition to these mechanisms for public participation, many agencies provide for public hearings not only at various stages during the performance of their statutory missions but during the impact statement process itself. The importance of the role citizens play in the impact statement process has been recog- nized by the courts. In many cases, the courts have upheld the right, or standing, of citizens to sue on environmental grounds. ------- Impact Statements and the Courts Since NEPA went into effect Federal courts have increasingly given more substance to the law's requirement for environmental impact statements. Suits charging violation of that section have dealt essentially with two significant questions: (1) whether a Federal agency should be required'to write impact statements; (2) to v/hat extent courts should review the content of statements already written. Cases have been filed in widely varying situations. Calvert Cliffs (Md.) Coordinating Committee vs. AEC was an early landmark case which set the direction of Federal agencies' NEPA responsibilities. The AEC was required to revise its activities to systematically analyze environmental impacts. Since then, Courts have handed down numerous decisions expanding Federal agency responsibilities under NEPA. Two important decisions indicate how courts have dealt with NEPA inter- pretations. Ely vs. Velde, decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit required the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration of the Department of Justice to prepare an impact statement in approving Federal funds for construction of a prison reception and medical center in Virginia. The court took account of "LEAA's overall involvement in the promotion and planning of the Center, as well as the cumulative impact of the proposed Federal action" in applying NEPA to a block grant situation where LEAA paid only 20 percent of the construction cost of the prison. Federal retention of the promotion and planning responsibilities was considered sufficient to bring the action within NEPA. In this decision, the Court greatly expanded the definition of actions affected by NEPA. The decision has meant applying NEPA to a wide range of Federal activities. The U.S. Supreme Court has greatly extended the range of considerations in judicially reviewing the substantive content of impact statements. Warm Springs Task Force vs Gribble temporarily halted further con- struction of the Warm Springs Dam Project in the Russian River Basin, California. The Court gave great deference to findings by the ------- Council on Environmental Quality that the Army Corps of Engineers statement did not adequately consider the safety and water quality effects of the project. The Court required the Corps to revise its impact state- ment and ordered the lower Court to review this revised statement in light of CEQ's findings. Thus, for the first time, CEQ's findings as principal overseer of the NEPA process were considered bv a Federal Court. What's Happening? The impact statement process has been designed to build into Federal agency thinking an environmental concern not heretofore implemented on an effective scale. Just as court interpretations are increasing general public environmental awareness, changes are being made within the structure of the Federal Government that will have pro- found influence on future Federal activities. Half of all environmental impact statements have been written for roadbuilding actions undertaken by the Federal Highway Admin- istration. The statements have resulted in significant planning changes. Examples include increased landscaping, the creation of hiking and bicycle trails along roadways, and, most importantly, the integration of mass transit routes into highway corridors and the overall coordination of highways into urban trans- portation system plans. After highway construction, the second largest number of statements have been pre- pared for watershed protection and flood control projects. A portion of these projects are developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Since NEPA was enacted, the Corps not only has established several citizen environmental advisory committees but has increased its interdisciplinary environmental staff by adding recreation resource planners, landscape architects, biologists, and foresters. There has been a noticeable increase in the preparation of impact statements in the energy related area. The Energy Policy Office prepared an impact statement on its priority system for allocating low-sulfur petroleum products. The Interior Department has prepared impact statements on the sale of 10 ------- oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf, on leasing Federal lands for oil shale and geothermal development, and on its coal mining plans. Future statements on coal development will examine the physical effects of proposed strip mining, .the competition between mining and existing uses of the land and water, and the comparative environmental costs of using coal as opposed to other energy sources. As a direct result of NEPA's review process, a number of Federally-sponsored projects have been suspended in recent years and many more have been modified to protect the environment. For example, in March 1972, a draft impact statement was prepared for a proposed 1760-foot pier for ocean research which would extend into the Atlantic from Maryland's Assateague Island National Seashore. The area is one of the few remaining natural barriers along the nation's eastern coastline under public ownership. Because of numerous opposing comments on the statement, the Corps of Engineers cancelled all construction plans. Another project cancelled was a proposed dredging operation to improve safety for barge crossings in the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Carrabelle to the St. Marks River, Fla. The project was suspended when it was determined that the dredging would adversely affect the natural habitat of shellfish and other fish in the area. Another project cancelled was a proposal by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for an incinerator to handle wastes from the Bethesda Naval Hospital, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and the National Institutes of Health Bethesda Campus. After the draft impact statement showed several preferable alternative means of disposal, the HEW scuttled plans for the incinerator. We are beginning to witness as environ- mental considerations are integrated into Federal agencies' plans, programs, and policy making, the elimination, before they reach the drawing board, of projects which would have had a significant impact on the environ- ment. This so-called "institutionalization" of NEPA was the foremost objective of legis- lators and administrators who vigorously 11 ------- pursued the enactment, and now the imple- mentation, of the law. Trends in State and Local Governments Recognizing the need for broader consideration of environmental conse- quences at an early date, a number of states have passed statutes requiring environ- mental impact statements on state actions analogous to the statements required of Federal agencies by NEPA. These states include California, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Connecticut, Hawaii, South Dakota, North Carolina, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. New Jersey, Michigan, and Texas have implemented impact statement requirements through Executive Order. In addition, Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Nebraska and Nevada have required impact statements to be prepared for certain limited classes of projects. Similar action was being considered in approximately fifteen other states. Even though the implementation of these State programs has been slow and the net effect so far appears to be fairly small, there is a widespread interest in NEPA-type State legislation and with good reason. The potential value of environmental impact statement requirements in the states is at least as great as at the Federal level. All in all, important innovations in Federal and State environmental regulations are taking place. At both levels, the pace of institu- tional development in environmental manage- ment has increased significantly over the last few years. The reader is free to quote or reproduce any part of this publication without further permission. 12 ------- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460 202—755-2750 Regional Offices Boston, Massachusetts 02203 New York, New York 10007 States covered Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island Vermont New Jersey, New York Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Delaware, Maryland 19106 Pennsylvania, Virginia West Virginia, D.C. Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Chicago, Illinois 60606 Dallas, Texas 75201 Kansas City, Missouri 64108 Denver, Colorado 80203 San Francisco, California 94111 Seattle, Washington 98101 Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Guam, Trust Territories of the Pacific, Wake Island Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington December 1974 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 ------- |