NEPA and Environmental Planning : Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners - Chapter 4 pdf

83 4 Performing a Systematic and Integrated Planning and Analysis Process Federal agencies are granted broad discretionary authority regarding how they choose to integrate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) into their planning processes including determining the appropriate strategies, procedures, and analytical methodologies to be used. For instance, an agency has a great degree of latitude in determining the scope and detail of the issues to be reviewed, the scientic methodology and models to be used in the analysis, and the methods required to insure scientic accuracy. Typically, the burden of proof in demonstrating that an agency has failed to comply in an appropriate manner with NEPA does not lie with the agency but with the party chal- lenging the agency. This chapter is designed to introduce the reader to the concepts of integrated and systematic analysis and planning. As such, this chapter introduces some of the fundamental environmental statutes, regulations, principles, and other requirements that must commonly be integrated with the NEPA planning process. 4.1 A FLEXIBLE PLANNING PROCESS As a planning tool, NEPA is particularly exible. Unlike most of the other environmental statutes, NEPA allows decision-makers to balance other factors such as political considerations, risk, cost, safety, and schedules in reaching a nal decision. NEPA requires agencies to account for envi- ronmental factors, yet it does not mandate unwieldy performance standards or other burdensome restrictions on project engineers or decision-makers. Relevant regulatory provisions that underscore this exibility include the following: Identify environmental effects and values in adequate detail so they can be compared to economic and technical analyses (§ 1501.2[b], emphasis added). An agency may discuss preferences among alternatives based on relevant factors includ- ing economic and technical considerations and agency statutory missions. An agency shall identify and discuss all such factors including any essential considerations of national policy, which were balanced by the agency in making its decision and state how those considerations entered into its decision (§ 1505.2[b], emphasis added). The “agency’s preferred alternative” is the alternative which the agency believes would fulll its statutory mission and responsibilities, giving consideration to economic, envi- ronmental, technical and other factors. The concept of the “agency’s preferred alternative” is different from the “environmentally preferable alternative,” although in some cases one alternative may be both. 1 The Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) NEPA regulations (Regulations) establish goals and procedural requirements, but leave the question of how such requirements are to be imple- mented largely to the discretion of individual agencies; agencies have thus been granted an unusu- ally wide degree of latitude (i.e., opportunity) and exibility in determining how they choose to • • • CRC_7559_CH004.indd 83CRC_7559_CH004.indd 83 1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 84 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners discharge their environmental impact statement (EIS) responsibilities. Nonetheless, many agencies have failed to take full advantage of this. The preparation of an EIS should be welcomed as an opportunity to formulate the agency’s preferred course of action, integrating all pertinent decision-making factors and minimizing cost by preventing disconnects and uncoordinated plans. For example, the EIS requirement to perform an alternative analysis can provide a mechanism for identifying more benign courses of action that may minimize or even avoid future permitting procedures, thus reducing costs while expediting project schedules. Mitigation measures provide a particularly effective tool for reducing future project risks. By incorporating mitigation into early planning, subsequent impacts may be avoided or reduced to the point where later project implementation and permitting requirements can be curtailed and in some cases entirely eliminated. 4.2 FOSTERING PLANNING AND INFORMED DECISION-MAKING All too often, NEPA is viewed simply as a process for preparing a document but nothing could be further from the truth. While preparing a document is indeed an integral component, preparation of environmental documents, even excellent ones, is not why NEPA was enacted. Rather, rst and foremost, NEPA should be viewed as a federal planning and decision-making process. The real purpose of NEPA is to provide decision-makers and the public with information that promotes informed decision-making. As noted in Table 4.1, the ultimate objective is to ensure that environmental impacts are properly considered before a nal decision is made to pursue a given course of action and “not to justify decisions already made” (§ 1502.2[g], § 1502.5). 2 Managed properly, the preparation of an EIS is simply the nal element of what is otherwise a rigorous environmental planning process. An EIS is merely a tool or mechanism and perhaps the nal step of the process undertaken by an agency to record the results of a comprehensive planning and decision-making process. Table 4.2 presents selected regulatory directions pertaining to planning and agency decision-making. TABLE 4.1 NEPA’s Purpose Is to Facilitate Informed Decision-Making Integrating the NEPA process into early planning to insure appropriate consideration of NEPA’s policies and to eliminate delay (§ 1501.1[a]). Ultimately, of course, it is not better documents but better decisions that count. NEPA’s purpose is not to generate paperwork—even excellent paperwork—but to foster excellent action. The NEPA process is intended to help public ofcials make decisions that are based on understanding of environmental consequence, and take actions that pro- tect, restore, and enhance the environment (§ 1500.1[c]). An environmental impact statement is more than a disclosure document. It shall be used by Federal ofcials in conjunction with other relevant material to plan actions and make decisions (§ 1502.1). The primary purpose of an environmental impact statement is to serve as an action-forcing device to insure that the policies and goals dened in the Act are infused into the ongoing programs and actions of the Federal Government (§ 1502.1). … analyses shall be circulated and reviewed at the same time as other planning documents (§ 1501.2[b]). An agency shall commence preparation of an environmental impact statement as close as possible to the time the agency is developing or is presented with a proposal … so that preparation can be completed in time for the nal statement to be included in any recommendation or report on the proposal. The statement shall be prepared early enough so that it can serve practically as an important contribution to the decision-making process and will not be used to rationalize or justify decisions already made (§ 1502.5). CRC_7559_CH004.indd 84CRC_7559_CH004.indd 84 1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC Performing a Systematic and Integrated Planning and Analysis Process 85 TABLE 4.2 Selected Citations Governing an Agency’s NEPA Planning Process Integrating the NEPA process into early planning … (§ 1500.5[a]) Integrate the requirements of NEPA with other planning and environmental review procedures … (§ 1500.2[c]) Agencies shall integrate the NEPA process with other planning at the earliest possible time … (§ 1501.2) … utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach … in planning … which may have an impact on man’s environ- ment … (§ 1501.2[a]) Environmental documents and appropriate analyses shall be circulated and reviewed at the same time as other planning documents (§ 1501.2[b]) Agencies may prepare an EA on any action at any time in order to assist agency planning … (§ 1501.3[b]) Hold an early scoping meeting or meetings which may be integrated with any other early planning meeting … (§ 1501.7[b][4]) [The EIS] shall be used by Federal ofcials in conjunction with other relevant material to plan actions … (§ 1502.1) Agencies shall prepare statements on broad actions so that they are relevant to policy and are timed to coincide with meaningful points in agency planning … (§ 1502.4[b]) Agencies shall cooperate with State and local agencies to the fullest extent possible … [and] shall … include: (1) Joint planning processes (§ 1506.2[b]) To better integrate EISs into State or local planning processes, statements shall … (§ 1506.2[d]) … utilize ecological information in the planning and development of resource-oriented projects (§ 1507.2[e]) … insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision-making … (§ 102[2][A] of NEPA, § 1507.2) TABLE 4.3 Requirements for Conducting an Early and Open NEPA Process Integrating the NEPA process into early planning (§ 1500.5[a], § 1501.1[a]) Preparing environmental impact statements early in the process (§ 1500.5[f]) … insure that environmental information is available to public ofcials and citizens before decisions are made and before actions are taken (§ 1500.1[b]) Agencies shall integrate the NEPA process with other planning at the earliest possible time … (§ 1501.2) There shall be an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed and for identifying the signicant issues … (§ 1501.7) … the environmental impact statement shall be prepared at the feasibility analysis (go-no go) stage … (§ 1502.5[a]). … commence preparation of an environmental impact statement as close as possible to the time the agency is devel- oping or is presented with a proposal (§ 1502.5) … prepared early enough so that it can serve practically as an important contribution to the decision-making pro- cess and will not be used to rationalize or justify decisions already made (§ 1502.5) 4.2.1 EARLY AND OPEN PROCESS Among the broad array of environmental and safety and health requirements, NEPA is virtually unique in that it is an integral part of an agency’s early planning process. Achieving this objective is crucial if an agency is truly using NEPA as a planning and decision-making tool, informing decision-makers and the public of the consequences of potential actions. Table 4.3 presents selected citations that elaborate on this requirement. CRC_7559_CH004.indd 85CRC_7559_CH004.indd 85 1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 86 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners 4.2.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The requirement governing public involvement is one of NEPA’s most important provisions. This requirement stated in the Act is as follows: Copies of such statement [EIS] and the comments and views of the appropriate federal, state and local agencies … shall be made available to the President, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the public … (Section 102[2][C] of the NEPA Act). This provision makes NEPA a “sunshine act,” as it requires that agency decision-making, with respect to environmental effects, be open to public input and review. NEPA’s public involvement requirements are described in more detail in later chapters. 4.2.3 DETERMINING THE SCOPE The term “scope” refers to the breadth and content of an NEPA analysis. The concept of scope involves three essential elements: Scope consists of the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in an environmental impact statement (§ 1508.25). The terms “actions, alternatives, and impacts” are dened and dissected in Chapter 8. The term “scoping” refers to the process by which an agency determines the range of issues to be considered in an analysis. Specically There shall be an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed and for identi- fying the signicant issues related to a proposed action. This process shall be termed scoping (§ 1501.7). Thus, an early and open process is to be performed in determining the scope of an EIS. Agencies are expected to “make diligent efforts to involve the public in preparing and implementing their NEPA procedures (§ 1506.6).” In one instance, an agency held scoping meetings and publicly advertised the opportunity to participate in the scoping process. Because no one from the public attended the meetings, the agency continued without public input. When challenged, the court ruled that it was not sufcient for an agency simply to provide the public with an opportunity to participate. The agency, in fact, must actively solicit public attention to gain participation. 4.3 SYSTEMATIC AND INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH NEPA’s requirement to use a systematic and interdisciplinary approach is arguably the single most important requisite for ensuring an accurate and comprehensive scientic analysis. This require- ment has been viewed by the courts as having a scope and applicability that extends beyond the EIS requirement to include environmental assessments (EAs) as well. 3 Table 4.4 provides guidance for implementing this requirement. The term “systematic” is interpreted to denote a disciplined process that is performed using a logically ordered and methodical approach. This requirement implies that a methodical step-by-step approach be used in which one stage of the process builds upon previous stages. The interdisciplinary requirement places a burden on agencies to ensure that the environmental analysis is performed by knowledgeable individuals or experts representing disciplines that may be potentially affected by or are fundamental to a thorough analysis. There is an important distinction between interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary specialists. In the context of NEPA, multidisciplinary implies the preparation of an analysis in which specialists CRC_7559_CH004.indd 86CRC_7559_CH004.indd 86 1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM1/31/2008 4:28:11 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC Performing a Systematic and Integrated Planning and Analysis Process 87 from various technical disciplines prepare independent sections of that analysis, but do not neces- sarily interface or communicate with one another. In contrast, an interdisciplinary analysis implies a “team” approach under which specialists from different technical disciplines interface and com- municate with one another. Related to this requirement is the issue of subject matter expertise. In one case, a challenge was made to an EIS, which resulted in approval of a permit from the Corps of Engineers for the construc- tion of a dam that could affect endangered species. The Corps asserted that it had relied on its internal experts in determining that there was no additional evidence indicating that any supplements needed to be added to the EIS. The court rejected this assertion because the administrative record did not demon- strate that the employees involved in the EIS review were sufciently qualied to address this issue. 4 4.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN ARTS As mentioned earlier, agencies are required to … utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision-making which may have an impact on man’s environment (§ 1501.2[a], emphasis added). The requirement to integrate environmental design arts is interpreted to mean that disciplines such as architecture and urban planning (e.g., environmental design arts) are to be integrated into the NEPA planning process so that federal actions blend more naturally into their surrounding environments. 4.4 INTEGRATING OTHER LAWS, PERMITS, AND ORDERS Experience shows that integrating NEPA into an agency’s early planning process is perhaps the single most effective means for improving efciency. Moreover, a CEQ study concluded that one of the principal causes for delays resulted simply from failure to integrate NEPA properly with other planning and environmental requirements (e.g., wetlands studies, cultural resources studies). For this reason, the CEQ recommends that agencies perform an integrated environmental planning process where various requirements are implemented in parallel rather than sequentially. As part of the scoping process, agencies are expected to identify other related environmental review and consultation requirements. To the fullest extent possible, agencies are directed to pre- pare and integrate draft EISs concurrently with other required environmental surveys, studies, and laws. Additionally, there are a number of statutory provisions in other laws and regulations requir- ing integration of environmental reviews or consultations with NEPA. 5 TABLE 4.4 Direction for Conducting a Systematic and Interdisciplinary Approach … utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision-making which may have an impact on man’s environment (§ 1501.2[a]) Make available staff support at the lead agency’s request to enhance the latter’s interdisciplinary capability (§ 1501.6[b][4]) Environmental impact statements shall be prepared using an inter-disciplinary approach. … The disciplines of the preparers shall be appropriate to the scope and issues identied in the scoping process (§ 1502.6) Fulll the requirements … of the Act to utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach … (§ 1507.2[a]) CRC_7559_CH004.indd 87CRC_7559_CH004.indd 87 1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 88 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners In furtherance of such requirements, the CEQ recently issued a draft document titled Collabo- ration Handbook. 6 The purpose of this handbook is to assist federal agency NEPA practitioners in expanding the effective use of collaboration as part of the NEPA process. The handbook outlines general principles, presents useful steps throughout the NEPA process, provides information on methods of collaboration, and presents case examples. As the rst part of Table 4.5 denotes, three requirements are specically listed in the Regulations as requirements to be integrated with the NEPA planning process (§ 1502.25[a]). Additional require- ments that also commonly need to be integrated with NEPA are listed in the second part of Table 4.5. Some of the most important requirements that need to be integrated or understood in terms of NEPA are described in the following sections. 4.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1970 The Environmental Quality Improvement Act (EQIA) of 1970 is intended to ensure that every fed- eral agency conducting or supporting public works activities affecting the environment implements policies established under existing law. 7 The EQIA is an Act that supplemented NEPA’s author- Quality is more widely known as the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Among other provisions, the EQIA added additional responsibilities to the CEQ. Its director has been tasked with responsibility for assisting and advising the president on federal policies and programs affect- ing environmental quality. The Ofce of Environmental Quality reviews the adequacy of existing environmental monitoring and predicting systems and also assists federal agencies in appraising the effectiveness of existing and proposed facilities affecting environmental quality. 4.4.1.1 Executive Order for Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality In 1970, President Nixon issued Executive Order 11514, which stated that the president, with assis- tance from the CEQ, would lead a national effort to provide leadership in protecting and enhancing the environment for the purpose of sustaining and enriching human life. 8 Federal agencies are directed to meet national environmental goals through their policies, programs, and plans. Agencies should also continually monitor and evaluate their activities to protect and enhance the quality of the environment. Consistent with NEPA, agencies are directed to share information about existing or potential environ- mental problems with all interested parties, including the public, in order to obtain their views. TABLE 4.5 List of Principal Environmental Statutes and Requirements That Need to Be Integrated with the NEPA Planning Process Requirements specically cited in the Regulations • National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). • Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). • Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.). Other environmental review laws and executive orders • Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 1271–1287). • Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C 1451 et seq.). • Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 (7 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.). • American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 1996). • Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (P.L. 101–508, 6601 et seq.). • Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898). • Protection of Wetlands (Executive Order 11990). • Floodplain Management (Executive Order 11988). CRC_7559_CH004.indd 88CRC_7559_CH004.indd 88 1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM ity. The EQIA also ‘created’ the Ofce of Environmental Quality. The Office of Environmental © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC Performing a Systematic and Integrated Planning and Analysis Process 89 4.4.2 FEDERAL LAND POLICY MANAGEMENT ACT The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is an agency within the Department of the Interior whose primary mission is to manage public lands, primarily those in western states. For many years, the BLM managed public lands under a number of different, and sometimes conicting, statutes. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 established for the rst time a single and comprehensive statutory mandate for retaining public lands under federal ownership and for managing those lands for the public. Under the FLPMA, the mission of the BLM was changed to one of multiple uses—a new concept in the 1970s. As a result, the future of the West was forever changed. This Act recognized the value of America’s public lands and provided a framework for manag- ing them in perpetuity for the benet of present and future generations. This Act requires the use of planning and the establishment of management programs for protecting the quality of scientic, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, water resource, and archaeological values on public lands. 4.4.2.1 Policy, Authority, and Responsibility With respect to the FLPMA, “public lands” or “the public domain” refers to all those lands that the United States has acquired from other nations or from Indian tribes and that have not been sold off or set aside as national forests, national parks, military reservations, etc. These lands, which are managed by the BLM, currently total more than 260 million acres (40% of all federally owned land), or 12% of the total land area, of the United States. The FLPMA also established several state- ments of general policy: 1. Federal ownership. Following a century old policy of using public lands to promote everything from homesteading to the construction of highways and railroads, FLPMA established a new policy; that is, for the most part, remaining public lands would be retained under federal ownership. Although land exchanges and sale of discrete tracts of land are still allowed, the overarching policy is to retain lands under federal ownership. 2. Multiple use and sustained yield. Under FLPMA, the BLM established a planning process similar to that used by other federal agen- cies. Periodically, the BLM must inventory public lands and their resources and develop resource management plans (RMPs). The BLM must manage public lands using multiple use and sustainable yield principles similar to those used by the Forest Service in managing national forests. Resources must therefore be used in a multiple use manner that best meets the needs of the American people and future generations. The BLM must consider the relative value of resources. This does not necessarily mean, how- ever, that the BLM must promote those uses having the greatest potential economic return or great- est unit output or, conversely, those uses that do not impair productivity of the land. 3. Withdrawal authority. Prior to the FLPMA, U.S. presidents often withdrew public lands on their own initiatives from specic uses or from sale. For example, land was sometimes withdrawn to prevent mining and oil/gas development, or preserve lands for specic uses (e.g., military bases). • • CRC_7559_CH004.indd 89CRC_7559_CH004.indd 89 1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 90 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners Previously, presidents relied on various federal statutes or even on their own implied power to make such withdrawals. Since 1976, FLPMA has delegated this authority to the Secretary of the Interior to withdraw public lands (BLM-managed lands). The secretary can also withdraw other federal lands such as those lying within national forests with the consent of the appropriate department head. Withdrawals are generally limited to a period of 20 years, meaning that Con- gress or the president must eventually take action to provide permanent protection to withdrawn lands. Case law. In a 2004 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a land use plan is generally a statement of priorities. 9 Although land use plans guide and restrain actions, they do not pre- scribe them. Members of the public cannot generally compel an agency to implement discretionary actions. Because the implementation of land use plans is subject to available appropriations, citizens can only compel an agency to take a specic action that it is already required to take. 4. Planning and public participation. The BLM uses its land use planning process to protect and designate uses of public lands and resources. FLPMA requires the BLM to consider present and potential uses of public lands, apply principles of multiple use and sustained yield management, give priority to the designation and protection of areas of critical environmental concern, and weigh long-term benets to the public against other short-term benets. When preparing an EA/EIS during an ongoing RMP revision (together with its accompanying EIS), there may be opportunities to consolidate some components of the NEPA process such as cumulative effects analysis and public involvement activities. After an RMP is approved, any authorizations and approved management actions based on a project-specic EIS (or EA) must specically be provided in the RMP or be consistent with its terms, conditions, and decisions. The planning sections of the BLM manual and the BLM planning handbook can be accessed at: http://www.blm.gov/nhp/200/wo210/landuse_hb.pdf. 4.4.3 NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT Section 101(16) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) denes natural resources as … land, sh, wildlife, biota, air, water, groundwater, drinking water supplies, and other such resources … An injury to a natural resource is a measurable adverse change in the chemical or physical qual- ity, or viability, of that resource. Damages can be assessed on the basis of loss or reduction in quantity and quality of natural resource services and represents the dollar value or the economic loss resulting from the injury. Damage assessments are based on the amount of the residual damage (i.e., damages that are not or cannot be addressed by the remedial or corrective action or that result from such actions). Services are the physical and biological functions performed by natural resources, including their use by humans and their services to other resources and ecosystems. Examples of resource services include habitat, food, recreation, esthetic value, drinking water, ood control, and waste assimilation. • • • • CRC_7559_CH004.indd 90CRC_7559_CH004.indd 90 1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC Performing a Systematic and Integrated Planning and Analysis Process 91 4.4.3.1 Assessment A natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) is a process whereby a natural resource trustee may pursue compensation on behalf of the public for injury incurred to natural resources. Only desig- nated federal trustees, authorized representatives of an affected state, or an affected Indian tribe can recover economic resource damages. Natural Resource Trustees conduct NRDAs to calculate the monetary cost of restoring injuries incurred to natural resources resulting from, for example, releases of hazardous substances or discharges of oil. An assessment plan details the scientic and economic methodologies to be used and the specic data to be collected. The preassessment screening process and the assessment plan activities can be coordinated with ongoing investigations such as a CERCLA Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Study (RFI/CMS). NEPA. Timely considerations of NRDA issues in NEPA documents can also be of strategic importance because Section 107 of CERCLA excludes liability for damages that result from a dis- charge or release when … the damages are specically identied as an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of a natural resource in an environmental impact statement or other comparable environmental analysis. Thus, if potential natural resource damage was identied in a NEPA document as an irreversible and irretrievable commitment before the action was undertaken, the damage is exempt from future economic damage assessments. Special conditions imposed by an applicable license or permit that authorized the commitment of resources may also be factored into a decision to exclude the release from liability for damages (other conditions may apply with respect to exclusion of liability for damages to the resources of an Indian tribe). 4.4.3.2 Contingent Valuation Method Research indicates that most people are willing to pay for environmental benets and the nonuse of resources that otherwise could be lost to future development. However, unless a dollar value is esti- mated for nonuse resources, it is likely that they will be treated implicitly as having no value. This leads to a quandary: How much are nonmarket environmental resources really worth and how can their real value be estimated? Often, the only option for estimating their value is by asking questions. One technique for estimating the economic worth or value of environmental resources is known as the contingent valuation method (CVM). The regulations for cost and damage recovery under the federal Superfund program explicitly recognize the use of contingent valuation as a tool for estimating such values. CVM can be used to estimate both the use and potential nonuse values of a given nonmarket resource. With respect to NEPA, CVM can be used both to evaluate NRDA and to evaluate and compare the cost and benets of the alternatives. CVM involves performing a survey in which people are asked how much they are willing to pay for specic environmental services. The method is called contingent valuation, because people are asked questions regarding their willingness to accept compensation contingent on a hypothetical scenario of losing a given resource. For instance, people might be asked the amount of compensa- tion they would be willing to accept to give up a specic environmental resource. For example, the Snake River RMP EIS used a CVM to identify nonmarket values associated with the public land parcels. In another case, the Bureau of Reclamation prepared an EIS to reevalu- ate operations of the Glen Canyon Dam; the bureau used CVM to quantify the impact of various dam ow alternatives on recreation and nonuse value resources. CVM was also used in the valua- tion of damages that resulted from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska in 1989 and for valuation of air quality improvement at the Grand Canyon. CRC_7559_CH004.indd 91CRC_7559_CH004.indd 91 1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM1/31/2008 4:28:12 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 92 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners The questionnaire used in one study put interviewees in the position of becoming decision-makers. In response to cost and benet information supplied to them, interviewees were asked questions about their preferences regarding incinerators involving different levels of pollution control technology. The researchers found that most people were willing to pay more for stricter control technologies if they believed that the health benets to be gained outweighed the costs. 10 Contingent valuation is categorized as a “stated preference” technique, because individuals are asked to estimate and state their values, rather than simply inferring values from actual choices, as is the case with “revealed preference” methods. Under this methodology, the value of resources as diverse as hunting and shing, wilderness experience, water use, and appreciation of scenic and visual resources can be gauged. Some prominent economists and psychologists question whether CVM can accurately gauge the true values people place on nonuse goods. Moreover, many have been unwilling to accept the results of CVM studies. Practitioners, therefore, are warned to use such methodologies cautiously. Nevertheless, nonuse values are real and ignoring them can signicantly understate total losses since they are frequently substantial. Despite criticism, many investigators working in natural resource and environmental areas have developed and used CVM, and it is currently the only widely used approach for estimating nonuse values. Simplied ve-step approach. While there are countless variations of CVM, the following ve-step approach demonstrates how this methodology can be applied to estimate the value of a resource. 1. Determine the specic resources (water, clean air, lack of health risks) to be examined and determine the relevant population to survey. For example, if the resource is a state park, the relevant population may consist of all citizens of that state. For a city, the relevant popula- tion might be restricted only to its citizens. 2. Determine a methodology for performing the survey (e-mail, mail, phone, in-person). Other questions involve determining who will be surveyed and how large the sample size will be. In-person interviews are often considered to be the most effective method but also tend to be the most expensive. 3. The most difcult part of the process is designing the survey. The design process is nor- mally performed by rst testing it on groups representing the types of people who will ultimately receive the nal survey. 4. After the survey has been designed and tested, it is implemented. Preferably, the survey sample (phone, mail, in-person) should be chosen randomly from the relevant population. 5. Once the survey data have been captured, the investigator analyzes and interprets the results. 4.4.4 POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT In passing the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, Congress formally established a national policy to prevent or reduce pollution at its source whenever feasible. 11 This Act establishes the following national policy: … that pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible; pollution that cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe manner whenever feasible; pollution that cannot be prevented or recycled should be treated in an environmentally safe manner whenever fea- sible; and that disposal or other release into the environment should be employed only as a last resort and should be conducted in an environmentally safe manner. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denes pollution prevention (P2) as … the use of materials, processes, or practices that reduce the use of hazardous materials, energy, water, or other resources and practices that protect natural resources through conservation or more efcient use. CRC_7559_CH004.indd 92CRC_7559_CH004.indd 92 1/31/2008 4:28:13 PM1/31/2008 4:28:13 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC [...]... Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 established a policy for a national program for the beneficial use, protection, and development of the land and water resources of the nation’s coastal zone.26 © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 101 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM 102 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners 4. 4.10.1 Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency... FWS, the NMFS, and state resource agencies have important advisory roles © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 99 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM 100 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners 4. 4.8.2 Typical Activities and Exemptions Activities in U.S waters regulated under this program include water resource projects (such as dams and levees), conversion... failed in its attempt through the God Squad and the Supreme Court, Congress © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 95 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 3 PM 96 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners later specifically exempted the Tellico Dam from the ESA, allowing the project to be completed (see Section 4. 4.7 .4 for an explanation of God Squad) Critics have... by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 97 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM 98 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners A large percentage of proposals having the potential to adversely impact a listed species can be effectively dealt with through informal consultation during the early planning process The need for further consultation may be avoided if project... by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 93 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 3 PM 94 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners Emissions of each pollutant must be consistent with the requirements and emissions milestones provided in the SIP If the conformity determination demonstrates that the proposed action would not conform to the SIP, then the federal agency cannot... the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and the P2 Act.12 In 1993, the CEQ issued guidance to federal agencies on how to incorporate pollution prevention principles, techniques, and mechanisms into their planning and decision-making processes and to evaluate and report those efforts, as appropriate, in documents pursuant to NEPA. 13 4. 4.5 CLEAN AIR ACT CONFORMITY AND NEPA The Clean... erosion .41 4. 4. 14. 2 Unique Farmland Land other than prime farmland that is used for the production of specific high-value food and fiber crops such as citrus, tree nuts, olives, cranberries, fruits, and certain vegetables .42 4. 4. 14. 3 Integration with NEPA The effect on prime farmlands is an important factor in determining the significance of an impact (§ 1508.27[b][3]) In 1990, the CEQ issued a memorandum... 4: 2 8:1 5 PM 108 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners Awareness of EJ was further increased when two major environmental conferences were held in the early 1990s As a result, the EPA created the Office of Environmental Equity in 1992, which was renamed the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) in 19 94 4 .4. 15.1 Executive Order On February 11, 19 94, President... the beneficial or detrimental magnitude (from +10 to –10) and the level of importance (1–10) of the © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 113 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 6 PM 1 14 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners Potential impact area Proposed action Construction Operation Topography and soils ** * Water quality ** ** Past action Air quality... considerations and incorporate use of ecological condition indicators in assessing impacts © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 117 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 7 PM 118 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners TABLE 4. 8 Principles of Biodiversity Conservation (CEQ 1993) 1 Take a “big picture” or ecosystem view 2 Protect communities and ecosystems . habitat. • • • CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 97CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 97 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 98 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners A. 101 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 4 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 102 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners 4. 4.10.1 Coastal. violations. • • • CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 93CRC_7559_CH0 04. indd 93 1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 3 PM1/31/2008 4: 2 8:1 3 PM © 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 94 NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners Emissions