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
------- |