Page:America's Highways 1776–1976.djvu/381

 The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) undertakes two substantive actions. First, it establishes the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). This three-man group is responsible for monitoring progress, or lack thereof, in the environmental field, for advising the President, and for making recommendations on future actions or programs which it believes should be adopted. Secondly, NEPA requires for each legislative proposal or other Federal action “significantly affecting the quality of the human environment” a detailed statement covering:


 * “(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 resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.”

These statements, known as environmental impact statements (EIS’s), must be prepared for all Federal-aid projects, including highways, meeting the test of “significantly affecting the quality of the human environment,” Their preparation is a two-stage operation: draft EIS’s are circulated to all concerned agencies and the public for review and comment; final EIS’s then incorporate comments and indicate their disposition. Since passage of NEPA, approximately half of all EIS’s prepared stem from highway projects.

All three of these requirements are similar in approach in that none of them authorizes the direct alteration or stopping of a project. All rely upon the wide dissemination of information and the opportunity for comments by others to influence the decisionmaking process and to prevent or mitigate environmental damage. Each has the incidental, but important, effect of helping to identify pertinent social, economic, and environmental considerations.

A fish ladder alongside I-84 in Connecticut aids the migration of fish while enhancing the natural environment.

In 1970 Congress decided that previous efforts by it and by the FHWA to assure adequate consideration of the environmental aspects of highways should be reinforced. Therefore, the 1970 Federal-Aid Highway Act added three related measures dealing with environmental considerations in general, noise standards, and air quality.

In dealing with general environmental considerations, the Department of Transportation was called upon to prepare and issue guidelines to assure (a) that possible social, economic, and environmental effects of proposed highway projects are fully considered and (b) that final decisions on highway projects are made in the best overall public interest, taking into account the need for fast, safe, and efficient transportation and the costs of eliminating or minimizing adverse effects.

The resulting guidelines, known as the “Process Guidelines,” are aimed at influencing the methods by which highway projects are developed rather than by attempting detailed supervision or control of plans or projects.

The Process Guidelines, officially issued in September 1972, require each State highway agency to prepare an Action Plan spelling out the organizational arrangement, the assignment of responsibilities, and the procedures to be followed in developing projects in conformity with congressional intent. The Guidelines outline issues which must be addressed, of which the following are particularly important:


 * Identification of social, economic and environmental effects, including, especially, the incidence of such effects upon specific groups and interests.
 * Consideration of alternative courses of action, including, to the extent appropriate, alternative locations, alternative types of scales of highway improvements, other transportation modes, and the option of no new construction (often referred to as the “no build” alternative).
 * Systematic interdisciplinary approach, including the need for consideration and evaluation of the social, economic, and environmental effects of highway projects by a wide range of professional skills.
 * Involvement of other agencies and the public, including the widespread dissemination of information and the active solicitation of comments and views during all stages of project development.

While coverage of the topics included in the Guidelines is required, the manner in which these subjects are addressed is left to the States, and thus, each State has considerable freedom in adjusting its Action Plan to its own needs and conditions.

As of May 23, 1975, 52 of a possible 53 State Action Plans were completed and approved, and while it is too early to make definite judgment on their long-range effectiveness, an FHWA report to Congress in 1974 concluded, “It is impossible to read the Action Plans so far approved without being struck by their thoroughness and sincerity. These Action Plans

375