China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
New guidelines and processes for development of additional water storage in the U.S.
Published in Jean-Pierre Tournier, Tony Bennett, Johanne Bibeau, Sustainable and Safe Dams Around the World, 2019
The NEPA was enacted on January 1, 1970 to require that federal agencies evaluate environmental impacts before taking action. NEPA is an umbrella law that addresses procedural requirements of other federal, state, and local statutes and Executive Orders (EOs). NEPA also requires that a specific review process be followed. Legal challenges to federal decisions can be upheld if any steps of the process are omitted or determined to be insufficient. Legal challenges can also be based on gaps in information or deficiencies in engineering and scientific assessments. Under NEPA, discretionary federal actions may require the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or a more rigorous Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) if impacts have the potential to be significant. These documents present evaluations of environmental consequences of the proposed action and alternatives.
Laws and Regulations
Published in Ralph L. Stephenson, James B. Blackburn, The Industrial Wastewater Systems Handbook, 2018
Ralph L. Stephenson, James B. Blackburn
The action-forcing part of NEPA is set forth in Section 102(2)(c). Here, the environmental impact statement (EIS) was created. All major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment must be considered in a document known as an EIS. The EIS includes alternatives to the proposed action, full disclosure of the environmental impacts of the proposed action, and a discussion of irreversible commitments of resources as well as short term gains vs. long term losses. The idea of the EIS is to place information in front of the decision-maker to allow that person to consider the environmental impacts of the proposed action when the decision about the project is made. NEPA requires that environmental impact be considered in decision-making and the EIS is the process by which the environmental impact is placed before the decision-maker.
Evaluation
Published in David M. Levinson, Kevin J. Krizek, Metropolitan Transport and Land Use, 2018
David M. Levinson, Kevin J. Krizek
A second more qualitative strategy has been in place in the United States since the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 established the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as a systematic way to ensure that environmental considerations were taken into account in decision-making (see Figure 10.2). Although the EIS is mostly procedural, and only requires provision of information, the clear and public presentation of information makes it difficult for decision-makers to capriciously disregard environmental issues. The EIS is prepared by government agencies (or consultants) to assess in detail the expected environmental impacts of a project. Major infrastructure projects are subject to the EIS process before they can be approved. The EIS requires determination of purpose and need for the project. The EIS compares alternatives, including the “no build” or “do nothing” alternative. The EIS evaluates foreseeable direct and indirect effects of the project on the affected environment and the consequences of those effects. The EIS must also note any conflicts with federal, state, or local policies, and incorporate comments and objections from the public, interest groups, and government agencies. Recommendations put forward in the EIS are inputs into the final decision, but the EIS itself does not result in a project being approved or rejected.
The Versatile Test Reactor Project: Mission, Requirements, and Description
Published in Nuclear Science and Engineering, 2022
Jordi Roglans-Ribas, Kemal Pasamehmetoglu, Thomas J. O’Connor
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the DOE is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of proposed alternatives for the construction and operation of a new test reactor, as well as associated facilities that are needed for performing post-irradiation evaluation of test articles and managing spent nuclear fuel. The EIS specifically examines the environmental impacts of building the VTR in two alternative locations, in addition to the no-action alternative: the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Two alternatives are also evaluated for the location of the driver fuel fabrication activities: the INL and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). After completion and publication of the EIS, the DOE will issue a record of decision (RoD) for the preferred alternative for the location of the VTR reactor, and later, another RoD for the fabrication of the fuel. The EIS process includes the publication of a draft for public comment6 and a period to respond to all public comments provided. The timeline for the completion of the NEPA process is illustrated in Fig. 2.