| dc.description.abstract |
The U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 heralded in an era of more
robust attention to environmental impacts resulting from larger scale federal projects.
The appeal of this type of environmental legislation is evidenced by the number of
other countries which have adopted NEPA’s framework. Mandates to review environmental
impacts, identify alternatives, and provide mitigation plans before commencement of
the project are at the heart of NEPA. Such project reviews have resulted in the development
of a vast number of reports and large volumes of project-specific data that potentially
can be used to better understand the components and processes of the natural environment
and provide guidance for improved and efficient environmental protection. However,
the Environmental Assessment (EA) or the more robust and intensive Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) that are required for most major projects more frequently than not
are developed to satisfy the procedural aspects of the NEPA legislation while they
fail to provide the needed guidance for improved decision-making. While NEPA legislation
recommends monitoring of project activities, this activity is not mandated, and in
those situations where it has been incorporated the monitoring showed that the EIS
was inaccurate in direction and/or magnitude of the impact. Many reviews of NEPA have
suggested that monitoring all project phases, from the design through the decommissioning,
should be incorporated. Information gathered though a well-developed monitoring program
can be managed in databases and benefit not only the specific project but would provide
guidance how to better design and implement future activities designed to protect
and enhance the natural environment.
|
|
