Assessing Environmental Impact | Environmental Impact | Environmental Inventories

Assessing Environmental Impact

Environmental engineering requires that the impact and interaction of engineered structures on and with the natural environment be considered in any project. In 1970 this principle was enacted into federal law in the United States. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that environmental impact be assessed whenever a federal action will have an environmental impact, as well as requiring that alternatives be considered. Many states have enacted similar legislation to apply to state or state-licensed actions. Since 1990, a number of “programmatic” environmental impact statements have been drafted.

Environmental impact of federal projects currently is performed in several stages: environmental assessment, a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) if that is appropriate, an environmental impact statement (if no FONSI is issued), and a record of the decision (ROD) made following the environmental assessment. In this chapter we consider the methods for making an environmental assessment as well as introducing the economic and ethical implications of environmental engineering.

Engineers ideally approach a problem in a sequence suggested to be rational by the theories of public decision-making: (1) problem definition, (2) generation of alternative solutions, (3) evaluation of alternatives, (4) implementation of a selected solution, and (5) review and appropriate revision of the implemented solution. This step-by step approach is essentially the NEPA process defined by the federal and state governments. This chapter presents an overview of environmental impact analysis. The specific analytical tools as well as the specific impacts and mitigation measures are discussed in detail in the other chapters of the book. However, impact assessment provides an integrated view of the problems of environmental engineering.

Environmental Impact

On January 1,1970, President Richard Nixon signed NEPA into law, setting a national policy to encourage “productive and enjoyable harmony” between people and their environment. This law established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which monitors the environmental effects of all federal activities, assists the President in evaluating environmental problems, and determines solutions to these problems.

However, few people realized in 1970 that NEPA contained a “sleeper,” Section 102(2)(C), that requires federal agencies to evaluate with public input the consequences of any proposed action on the environment:

Congress authorizes and directs that, to the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regulations, and public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in this chapter, and (2) all agencies of the Federal Government shall include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on-

        i.            the environmental impact of the proposed action,

      ii.            any adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided should the proposal be

    iii.            alternatives to the proposed action,

    iv.            the relationship between local short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and

       v.            any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would be involved in implemented, the proposed action should it be implemented.

In other words each project funded by the federal government or requiring a federal permit must be accompanied by an environmental assessment. This assessment results in issuance of one of three documents:

(1) Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSZ). Such a stand-alone finding results when potential environmental impacts are compared to a checklist of significant impacts, with the result that no significant impact can be identified.

(2) Environmental Assessment (EA). A detailed assessment of potential environmental impact resulting in one of two conclusions: either the EA must be expanded to a full-scale environmental impact statement or a FONSI results from the EA.

(3) Environmental Impact Statement (EZS). An EIS must assess in detail the potential environmental impacts of a proposed action and alternative actions. Additionally, the agencies must generally follow a detailed public review of each EIS before proceeding with the project or permit. It should be noted that both positive and negative impacts are included; i.e., “impact” does not imply “adverse impact.”

These impact statements are assessments and contain no judgments about the positive or negative value of the project in question. An EIS publication sequence is prescribed by law. First, a draft EIS (DEIS) is issued by the appropriate federal agency. After mandated public hearings and incorporation of comments, the federal agency issues a final EIS (FEIS). A Record of Decision (ROD), which includes the final decision about the project, the alternative chosen, and any value judgments, is also issued.

The purpose of environmental assessments was not to justify or fault projects, but to introduce environmental factors into the decision-making machinery and have them discussed in public before decisions about a project are made. However, this objective is difficult to apply in practice. Alternatives may be articulated by various interest groups in and out of government, or the engineer may be left to create his or her own alternatives. In either case, there are normally one or two plans that, from the outset, seem eminently more feasible and reasonable, and these are sometimes legitimized by juggling, for example, selected time scales or standards of enforcement patterns just slightly and calling them alternatives, as they are in a limited sense. As a result, “nondecisions” are made (Bachrach and Baratz 1962), Le., wholly different ways of perceiving the problems and conceiving the solutions have been overlooked, and the primary objective of the EIS has been circumvented. Over the past few years, court decisions and guidelines by various agencies have, in fact, helped to mold this procedure for the development of environmental impact statements.

As the environmental assessment procedure has evolved, assessment of socioeconomic impact of the project has played an increasing role. In addition to direct economic impact (number of jobs, total household income, property values, etc.), socioeconomic impact includes impacts on archaeological and historical sites, impacts on sites that have cultural significance and on cultural practices, and environmental justice impacts (assessments of excessive impacts on minority populations). As impact assessment moves into successively “softer” science, overlap with questions of ethics and values increases, and the engineer must take care to differentiate between quantitatively measurable impacts and qualitative assessments that might be influenced by value judgments. Risk assessment has also become increasingly important in environmental assessment.

Environmental Inventories

The first step in evaluating the environmental impact of a project’s alternatives is to inventory factors that may be affected by the proposed action. Existing conditions are measured and described, but no effort is made to assess the importance of a variable. Any number and many kinds of variables may be included, such as:

1. the “ologies”: hydrology, geology, climatology, anthropology, and archaeology;

2. environmental quality: land, surface and subsurface water, air, noise, and transportation impacts;

3. plant and animal life;

4. economic impact on the surrounding community: number of jobs, average family income, etc.;

5. analysis of the risks to both people and the natural environment from accidents that may occur during the life of the project; and

6. other relevant socioeconomic parameters, like future land use, expansion or diminution of the population of urban areas and exurbs, the impacts of non-resident populations, and environmental justice considerations.

 

Stay connected with us for more useful posts.