Introduction - Environmental Impact Analysis: Process and Methods - page 3

analysis was designed to open the process to the public, predict changes in
environmental resources as consequences of a proposed actions, consider
alternatives and other measures to mitigate any adverse consequences, and
include the results of environmental analysis both early in the project formu-
lation and in the final decision processes. Carried out well, environmental
analysis also takes a holistic view of the environment, integrating effects on
multiple environmental resources across varying lengths of time. The analy-
sis was critical to implementing the policy statement because it forced a tech-
nical evaluation of the environmental repercussions of proposed actions and
made adherence to the stated environmental policy enforcible. More often
than not, with NEPA being the prime example, the mandate for environ-
mental analysis did not set standards or require environmental protection.
However, in almost every case the environmental analysis mandate included
a public disclosure and an active public input component. These aspects of
environmental analysis opened the process to the public and promoted envi-
ronmental accountability by decision makers. Given the transparency of the
process, it was difficult for a responsible official to announce in the public
eye that she or he had decided to implement a project that caused irreparable
environmental damage because the alternative courses of action made life
more difficult for the decision makers and their agencies, or that the environ-
mentally preferable alternative was marginally more expensive. The require-
ment for environmental impact analysis and assessment also brought to the
forefront the need for environmental standards to measure and express the
significance and relative intensity of impacts. This set the stage for the enact-
ment of multiple environmental resource protection measures such as the
Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, which are the basis for the third prong
in the environmental protection strategy.
The third and final prong in the environmental infrastructure was a permit-
ting or approval system based on protection of a single environmental resource
(e.g., air, water, historic properties, and endangered species). These statutes,
acts, and regulations typically establish standards or criteria that set the allow-
able level of resource alteration that will not compromise the sustainable values
of the resource. Water quality limits (e.g., the allowable copper concentration,
temperature, or pH of a water body or effluent) are classic examples of such
standards. Thus, environmental legislation such as the U.S. Clean Water Act
not only establishes such protections (by requiring the states to set enforceable
water-quality standards) but also requires a permit to allow discharges into the
receiving waters, monitoring of the discharge quality, and a demonstration that
the discharge quality will not result in a violation of the standards.
The integration of these three prongs is perhaps more critical to environ-
mental protection than any one individually. The policy alone does not force
specific environmental protection or enhancement action and the analysis
requirement generally does not mandate specific environmental protection.
Environmental permits can force environmental protection but they are nar-
rowly focused so that protection of one resource can often be accompanied