The Environmental Impact Statement Process

• Author: Frank B. Friedman
• Pages: 417-429

Chapter 11:

The Environmental Impact

Statement Process

It is beyond the scope of this book to describe specific permitting pro-

cesses or to discuss NEPA1or state “NEPAs”2in detail. This chapter

gives some basic suggestions on handling the EIS process. I have worked

with NEPAsince its early days, advising the oil and gas and mining indus-

tries on the basics and practical realities of implementing the statute,3and

on a variety of litigation and projects involving NEPAand those industries.

For those of you who are new to this area, NEPAwas the first statute of

the environmental “revolution” and was designed to ensure that projects’

environmental impacts would be fully considered. The key section of NEPA

is §102(2)(C), which requires an EIS for “major Federal actions signifi-

cantly affecting the quality of the human environment.”4This language is

fairly simple, but has spawned extensive litigation over specific fact pat-

terns. In my wildest imagination, I never would have dreamed that there

would still be substantial litigation more than 30 years after NEPAwas pro-

mulgated. Such actions include most federal permitting activities, exclu-

sive of EPApermits. An EIS must address the following:

(i) the environmental impact of the proposed action,

(ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be

avoided should the proposal be implemented,

(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 re-

sources which would be involved in the proposed action should

it be implemented.5

417