|
The Role of Environmental Monitoring in Responsible Project Management (pdf)
Canter, L.W.
The Environmental Professional, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1993, pp. 76-87
A comprehensive (or targeted) environmental monitoring program should be required of major projects as a part of their life cycle, and the resultant information should be used in environmentally responsible management and decisionmaking. Current monitoring considerations are focused on their implementation of mitigation measures. Additional valid purposes of environmental monitoring are illustrated via eight case studies. A comprehensive or targeted environmental monitoring program should use extant monitoring data and coordinate with pertinent governmental monitoring systems. Program planning and implementation should delineate objectives related to expected key impacts, select pertinent indicators (variables), determine sampling location and frequency and analytical requirements, predevelop response strategies (management actions), and schedule periodic reporting.
Pragmatic Suggestions For Incorporating Risk Assessment Principles in EIA Studies (pdf)
Canter, L.W.
The Environmental Professional, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1993, pp. 125-138.
Based on recent expansions in coverage of both risk assessment (RA) and EIA studies, it is timely to develop specific actions to ensure the incorporation of RA principles in the EIA process. The EIA process benefits would include: (1) encouragement of integrated thinking by the interdisciplinary teams conducting EIA studies; (2) the opportunity to focus attention on risk reduction activities; and (3) emphasis on emergency response measures in the event of accidents and associated environmental perturbations. Practical suggestions for incorporating RA principles and steps are given, and brief examples of actual approaches used to address health risks in five EISs are described.
Impact Significance Determination - Basic Considerations and a Sequenced Approach (pdf)
Canter, L.W., and Canty, G.A.
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol. 13, No. 5, September, 1993, pp. 275-297.
Determination of the significance of anticipated impacts of proposed projects is a key component in the EIA process. This paper summarizes some findings of a survey of such definitions resulting from American, European, and other international experiences; both generic definitions and substantive area definitions are highlighted. A sequenced approach for impact significance determination is described, with this approach organized around ten groups of issues or questions. Examples of such issues include project type/size, project locations in areas with protected or critical resources, and environmental stresses resulting from waste residuals from the project. Finally, the uses of significance criteria include: (1) determining if an EIS will be required, or if an environmental assessment/finding of no significant impact (EA/FONSI) will suffice; (2) identifying the impacts that should be mitigated; (3) planning a baseline and/or post-EIS environmental monitoring program; and (4) documenting the interpretive rationale.
Planning and Operational Guidelines For Mitigation Banking For Wetland Impacts (pdf)
Canter, L.W., and Weems W.A.
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol. 15, No. 3, May, 1995, pp. 197-218.
Mitigation of wetland losses due to development activities is an important public policy issue in the United States. Such mitigation could include avoidance, minimization, rectification, reduction, or compensation. If the first four measures are not feasible, then compensation is required. Wetland mitigation banking is one type of compensation; it refers to a process where a developer purchases a land area and restores, enhances, or creates plant or animal wetland habitat prior to any development activities. These improvements are quantified and credit is placed in a bank; at a later date, when unavoidable impacts due to the development occur, the credit can be withdrawn. This paper is based on a questionnaire survey of 19 existing and 20 proposed banks in the United States. The survey focused on bank goals, site selection, bank operator, policies for credit (habitat units) establishment and usage, preferred wetland development options, criteria for bank usage, long-term management plans, and construction and maintenance requirements. The survey results were then used to formulate 10 generic guidelines for planning and operating banks.
Questionnaire Checklist for Cumulative Impacts (pdf)
Canter, L. W., and Kamath, J
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol. 15, No. 4, July, 1995, pp. 311-339.
The study described herein was conducted to delineate the types of cumulative impact methods being used in scientific studies and/or EISs and to couple this information with existing EIA methodologies to delineate a generic methodology that could provide a framework for cumulative impact identification and assessment. Eight scientific studies were reviewed, and the utilized methods included five interaction matrices and/or composite indices, two geographic information systems, and one simple checklist. Five EISs were also reviewed relative to how cumulative impacts were addressed and the methodologies utilized. The five EISs included oil and gas leasing and development in New Mexico, a housing/urban development project in McKinney, Texas, a program to install and operate terminal Doppler weather radar facilities at airport locations across the United States, a reservoir project in the Rogue River Basin in Oregon, and a surface lignite mine in Titus County, Texas. All five EISs addressed cumulative impacts to some extent – a simple checklist methodology was used for each. Based on these findings, a structured questionnaire checklist is proposed for usage in scoping cumulative effects, addressing detailed impact issues, and summarizing the results of cumulative effects considerations in an impact study.
Addressing Future Actions in Cumulative Effects Assessment (pdf)
Rumrill, J. N., and Canter, L. W
Project Appraisal, Vol. 12, No. 4, December, 1997, pp. 207-218
Consideration of cumulative effects within the EIA process in the United States involves an analysis of the proposed action in view of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions (RFFAs) in the related environs. In EIA practice in the U.S., over 40 court cases have involved cumulative effects, and many of them have hinged on RFFAs. This paper summarizes the lessons learned, including contradictions, and inconsistencies, from the relevant court cases. Such lessons can form the basis for systematic criteria to determine when any possible future action becomes a RFFA, thus necessitating its inclusion in cumulative effects considerations. An eight-step conservative determination method is proposed for delineating RFFAs for inclusion in studies which address cumulative effects. Although the method was based on principles and lessons derived from U.S. court cases, it can be used internationally to help delineate RFFAs.
Planning Environmental Monitoring Programs Within The Environmental Impact Assessment Process (pdf)
Harrington, J.M. and Canter, L.W.
International Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 55, 1998, pp. 305-331.
Monitoring of impacts resulting from proposed projects has been included as a component within the EIA process of numerous countries and entities since the mid-1980s. Many studies have delineated both purposes and benefits of such monitoring. However, lesser attention has been given to technical guidance for planning and implementing such monitoring programs. This paper summarizes several technical elements that should be included in monitoring programs; the elements were identified via published literature and the systematic review of described programs in nine EISs prepared in the 1993-94 time frame. The EISs ranged from timber sales to developments in recreational areas to resource management planning. Based upon this review, 12 elements are recommended for inclusion, as appropriate, in planning and implementing monitoring programs.
Impact Indices for Grazing Actions (pdf)
Edwards, A.J. and Canter, L.W.
International Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 56, 1999, pp. 571-589.
Proposals for animal grazing actions on federal lands in the United States are subject to both permit requirements and the EIA process. Such actions are often controversial due to the detrimental effects of overgrazing on vegetation, soil, riparian zones, water quality, and wildlife habitat. This paper highlights the potential negative environmental impacts of livestock grazing on rangelands in the western United States, identifies techniques or models that could be used to determine the severity of these impacts, and enumerates several indices which have been used to summarize environmental data in relation to decision-making processes. Nine such indices, along with several additional ones which could be reasonably developed, are described herein. These indices, used either individually or in a composite format, could serve as bases for identifying vulnerable rangelands, provide a framework for impact prediction, target monitoring efforts to identified rangelands, facilitate the determination of sustainable grazing practices, select mitigation measures, and document decisions for new or renewal grazing permits.
Cumulative Air Quality Effects Assessment (pdf)
Rumrill, J. N., and Canter, L. W.
Federal Facilities Environmental Journal, Autumn, 2000, pp. 19-38.
Federal agencies in the United States are required to consider the cumulative effects of their activities combined with those of others. This requirement has placed a burden on the EIA process due to the technical complexities involved with cumulative effects assessment (CEA). This article presents a CEA methodology that reduces some of the inherent complexities by focusing on the cumulative influence to a single environmental resource, ambient air quality. An eight-step method is presented herein as a tool for the assessment of cumulative air quality effects. Procedures for accomplishment of the more difficult steps, such as the determination of what activities to include in the evaluation and how to determine the significance of a cumulative effect, are also included.
The Influence of Incomplete or Unavailable Information on Environmental Impact Assessment in the USA
Atkinson, S. F., Canter, L. W., and Ravan, M. D.
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol. 26, Issue 5, 2006, pp. 448-467.
Email atkinson@unt.edu to request an electronic copy of this paper
One of the more common activities of environmental scientists in the United States is the preparation of environmental assessments or environmental impact statements in response to the National Environmental Policy Act. The central thesis herein revolves around a frequent dilemma those scientists face: how to proceed with the impact analysis when information on potential impacts is incomplete or unavailable. This paper examines how the “hard look” standard that U.S. courts have imposed upon agencies considering proposed actions came about. Further, U.S. courts have said agencies cannot make arbitrary and capricious decisions when deciding to build a project, implement a plan, issue a permit or other give other approvals, and this paper discusses how the courts have defined what arbitrary and capricious decisions are, especially when decisions are made when information about impacts is incomplete or unavailable. The paper examines why agencies win or lose lawsuits filed against the EAs and EISs they write, focusing on those cases that have occurred after the Supreme Court ruled on the issue in 1989. The paper also provides recommendations for scientists faced with the dilemma of incomplete or unavailable information.
|
|
|
Adaptive Management and Integrated Decision Making - An Emerging Tool for Cumulative Effects Management (pdf)
Canter, L.W. and Atkinson, Sam
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Adaptive management (AM) is being used as a follow-up tool within environmental impact assessment and cumulative effects assessment (EIA/CEA) studies. Typical AM processes incorporate management objectives, conceptual to quantitative models, management choices, monitoring, systematic decision making, and stakeholder collaboration. Such processes can be used to reduce cumulative effects uncertainties, and inform decision making relative to local and regional operational practices to minimize the incremental effects of proposed actions, as well as the management of regional cumulative effects resulting from multiple past, current, and future contributors. Based on an analysis of fundamental concepts, practices, and case studies the following key lessons and needs have been identified: (1) Due to numerous uncertainties associated with CEA, AM can be a useful tool for increasing the cumulative effects knowledge base, as well as determining the effectiveness of project mitigation and regional management measures. (2) Decision flowcharts and AM decision matrices can facilitate the learning and necessary decisions associated with AM programs. Such flowcharts and matrices should be both understandable to a range of audiences, and integrative in relation to developing a holistic perspective on management choices and their environmental implications. (3) There is a fundamental need to develop comparative case studies illustrating exactly how AM has been incorporated in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance documents which address significant cumulative effects issues and their management. (4) NEPA practitioners, along with AM practitioners, need to recognize that AM concepts can be included within NEPA documents without specific referrals to AM itself. Further, both types of practitioners need to recognize the broad range of both AM practices and types of NEPA documents. Accordingly, “strict perspectives” on what AM is, or is not, will not be useful or encouraging. (5) Central deterrents to AM include both additional budgetary and time requirements. Accordingly, there is a need to carefully delineate the actual benefits and costs of AM requirements in a series of case studies.
Conceptual Models, Matrices, Networks and Adaptive Management - Emerging Methods for CEA (pdf)
Canter, L.W.
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
CEA can be aided by the use of an expanded set of methods. Four examples include conceptual models, modified interaction matrices, networks, and adaptive management (AM) processes. Conceptual models range from summarized scientific knowledge to graphical depictions of environmental resources, their interrelationships, and potential changes resulting from multiple actions and stressors. Modified matrices and networks can be used to address connections between proposed actions, other actions and identified VECs. Step-wise approaches for developing modified matrices and networks are also described. The AM process, which can be used to reduce uncertainties and inform the science of CEA, is thoroughly described in a corollary paper. Accordingly, and based upon concepts and case studies involving conceptual models, matrices, and networks, it can be noted that there are numerous examples of these three types of methods being used in CEA studies. The examples could be directly used in other studies or appropriately modified to meet specific site and study needs. Documentation of the rationale for the selected methods, as well as their assumptions and key features, can facilitate the aggregation of best practices approaches. The included case studies, and their usage of these three types of methods, represent extensions of the use of similar tools for addressing the direct and indirect effects of singular proposed actions via the EIA process. Finally, as the practice of CEA matures, it can be expected that continuing creativity will lead to still additional modifications and improvements in conceptual models, matrices, and networks.
Promoting Environmental Sustainability Via An Expert Elicitation Process (pdf)
Swor, Tom and Canter, L.W.
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Environmental sustainability (ES) planning was applied to the 981-mile, commercially navigable Ohio River. Navigation improvement needs were identified within the broad study along with actions to restore aquatic and riparian ecological resources to a higher state of sustainability. The actions were identified via an Expert Elicitation Process (EEP) involving aquatic and riparian/terrestrial experts knowledgeable of Ohio River resources. The received information was synthesized into goals for the selected resources (Valued Ecosystem Components – or VECs), actions or measures to attain the goals, and monitoring to evaluate conditions. Finally, 26 types of ES actions were identified and classified into three ES alternatives. These alternatives were then evaluated relative to key decision criteria, and such evaluations, based on pertinent decision criteria, were also conducted for four navigation improvement alternatives. Finally, the best combination of ES and navigation alternatives was identified. The key lessons derived from this use of EEP were that: (1) EEP can support the preliminary identification of ES measures, however, more detailed study of specific designs and cost evaluations will be necessary; (2) the method promotes collaboration between key scientists and policymakers from governmental agencies and private sectors, and such collaboration will ultimately provide the foundation for implementation of sustainability actions; and (3) an effective EEP does not occur by accident, it requires careful planning, implementation, and documentation.
Environmental Indicators, Indices and Habitat Suitability Models
Canter, L.W. and Atkinson, S.F.(pdf)
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Both environmental indicators and multi-metric indices are useful for describing baseline conditions and qualitatively predicting the cumulative consequences of multiple actions. Several examples and case studies with indicators and/or indices are presented herein. They can be easily modified for usage in CEA. Habitat suitability models reflect special indices related to habitat needs and quality for specific species or broad habitat types. Such models have been used to address direct and indirect effects, and with some modification, they can be also used to address cumulative effects of multiple actions. This review of environmental indicators and indices, and habitat suitability models has indicated that there are numerous examples of such tools which have been or could be used in both EIA and CEA. Some key lessons from this review are: (1) in conducting CEA studies, it is useful to think from the mindset that “I am the VEC or indicator, and what is my historical and current condition and how have I, or will I, be affected by multiple past, present, and future actions?”; (2) due to the likely absence of detailed information on future actions, the described tools can still be used to “predict” future conditions by focusing on up-or-down changes in individual indicators or their aggregated displays; and (3) numerous regional and site-specific tools are currently being developed, with primary examples being indices of biological integrity for specific watersheds and water bodies. Such tools, even though they may not have been developed for CEA usage, can certainly benefit CEA studies and practice. Finally, usage of selected and appropriate tools as described herein can aid in conducting systematic and documentable CEA studies.
State of Practice of Cumulative Effects Assessment and Management: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly (pdf)
Canter, L.W. and Ross, Bill
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
The historical, current, and anticipated future international practice of cumulative effects assessment and management (CEAM) is addressed. The “context” of CEAM is explained and challenges from scientific and policy issues and numerous uncertainties are described. A six step generic process for carrying out CEAM is provided. Opportunities for mitigation and management are highlighted, with emphasis given to “collaboration” as a foundational element for dealing with cumulative effects. This state-of-practice paper concludes by noting six “ugly lessons” (lack of appropriate attention), eight “bad lessons” which reflect cumulative effects practices that need improvement, and 12 “good lessons”, which can be used articulate good practice principles related to CEAM. Examples of these good practice principles include: a VEC-based perspective is used in planning and conducting CEAM studies; both proponent and agency context scoping, and public scoping, is conducted; generic CEAM frameworks are applied to specific VECs, and their application and findings are carefully documented and explained; cumulative effects on specific VECs or their indicators are used as integrators of project effects at local, regional, and strategic spatial areas; CEAM is employed as a useful basis for addressing environmental sustainability; and CEAM relies on principles, methods, and tools from EIA practice. In many situations; some modification of EIA methods and tools is effectively carried out for use in CEAM. In summary, the practice of CEAM is growing out of its infancy. As experience is accrued, it is anticipated that good practice principles will be further articulated and utilized on an international basis to improve the professional practice of CEAM.
A Matrix-Based CEA Process for Marine Fisheries Management (pdf)
Canter, L.W. and Tomey, David
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Summarized herein is a matrix-based, two-component process for planning and conducting cumulative effects assessment (CEA) studies to be incorporated into environmental impact statements (EISs) and environmental assessments (EAs) prepared for Marine Fishery Management Plans. The process incorporates CEQ’s 11-step CEA approach divided into two components – scoping and baseline, and impact analysis. Each component is comprised of requisite building blocks from the 11 steps. For example, scoping and baseline integrates affected environment information for selected VECs (valued ecosystem components) with effects information from other fishing and non-fishing actions to define the CEA Baseline. The impact analysis component integrates the CEA baseline findings with the direct and indirect impacts of alternatives on the VECs to determine cumulative effects. The identified cumulative effects are then evaluated relative to their significance, and necessary follow-on activities such as monitoring and adaptive management. Practical approaches are described for each building block and the development of matrix tables which can be used to summarize the findings. Key lessons include: (1) multiple matrices will be needed to address the contributions of direct/indirect effects of proposed actions and other actions (past, present, and future) on pertinent study VECs; (2) this usage can provide a consistent approach for both identifying and evaluating cumulative effects; further, the rows and columns in specific matrices can be modified to meet specific study needs; (3) net impact summary information in individual matrix tables can inform decision makers and the decision making process: (4) when effects codes are used (positive, neutral, negative, etc.), the codes should be clearly defined in the text and, if appropriate, in footnotes to the tables; and (5) the two-component process provides the basis for a “hard look” (a phrase used in USA court decisions as a test of NEPA documentation adequacy), and it is in compliance with United States case law findings related to CEA.
Multiple Uses of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) (pdf)
Atkinson, S.F., Canter, L.W. and Mangham, W.M.
Assessing and Managing Cumulative Environmental Effects, Special Topic Meeting, International Association for Impact Assessment, November 6-9, 2008, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Due to spatial and temporal considerations in CEA, GIS can be a useful tool within such studies. The uses can range from addressing temporal land use changes, to describing declines or recoveries of habitat types in the study area. GIS information can also be used in predictive modeling of historical, current, and future cumulative effects. Further, such GIS information can be used in planning local mitigation and regional management programs. Brief information from over 20 case studies illustrating these uses are described herein. Further, it should be noted that CEA usage is a natural outgrowth of GIS usage in the EIA process. These case studies provide illustrations of the use of GIS as a tool for present-ation of both historical and current baseline information and the identification and analysis of direct and indirect effects from the proposed project, as well as cumu-lative effects from both the proposed project and multiple other actions in the study area. It can also be noted that larger geographic scale CEA studies which require regional analyses are typically more conducive to the use of GIS. Based on the legal system in the USA, it was also found that the use of GIS is currently been seen in favorable light when the topic appears in litigation. Finally, as GIS tools and skills become more practical and widespread, the use of this technology in CEA practice will be expected to increase.
Comparative Review of Effluent Trading Programs (pdf)
Canter, L.W. and Edwards, A.J.,
19th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, June 15-19, 1999, Glasgow, Scotland
Effluent trading programs (ETPs), which allow water pollutant dischargers the flexibility to select the most cost-effective control alternatives for their specific situations, have been proposed as a market-based approach for achieving water quality standards in watersheds experiencing adverse cumulative water quality effects. The international survey described herein was designed to gather information on 12 point-point, point-nonpoint, and nonpoint-nonpoint source ETPs that were operational or in the final stages of development in June, 1998. Survey responses are highlighted relative to 10 components in a qualitative model for ETP planning: (1) watershed suitability; (2) pollutant type; (3) trading market size and characteristics; (4) legal authority; (5) administrative acceptability and capability; (6) specific policies, procedures, and trading rules; (7) pre- and post-trading monitoring; (8) enforcement mechanisms; (9) program evaluation; and (10) public involvement. Unique characteristics of selected ETPs that may make them particularly successful are mentioned, and observations regarding the usability of the qualitative model are included.
Qualitative Model for Effluent Trading Programs (pdf)
Canter, L.W., Szekely, F. and Edwards, A.J.,
19th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, June 15-19, 1999, Glasgow, Scotland
Effluent trading programs (ETPS) may be particularly useful for project planning and the identification of mitigation options when addressing concerns related to cumulative water quality effects. The qualitative model described herein has been designed to encourage active effluent trading by identifying the factors that may affect ETP performance in a particular watershed and reducing or eliminating their negative influence. The model is based on 37 criteria questions divided into ten components: (1) watershed suitability; (2) pollutant type; (3) trading market size and characteristics; (4) legal authority; (5) administrative acceptability and capability; (6) specific policies, procedures, and trading rules; (7) pre- and post-trade monitoring; (8) enforcement mechanisms; (9) program evaluation; and (10) public involvement. Each component and the associated questions are described. The model can be used for evaluating existing or proposed ETPs, comparing the features of two or more existing ETPs, and evaluating the potential applicability of effluent trading in a particular watershed subjected to cumulative effects concerns relative to water quality.
Addressing Cumulative Effect Within Impact Study Documents (pdf)
Canter, L.W.
20th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, June 19-23, 2000, Hong Kong.
As greater attention is given to the incorporation of cumulative effects assessment (CEA) within the EIA process, it has been recognized that guidance is needed on the topics which should be addressed and where such information should be included within impact study documents. Current choices for incorporation include a separate chapter or the integration of the subject in individual chapters related to describing the affected environment, impact prediction and assessment, and decision making between alternatives for meeting identified needs. Either approach can be supported by technical appendices providing detailed information. Based upon several case studies as well as institutional guidance, a checklist of topical issues for inclusion is described. These issues include, but are not limited to: (1) defining key terms and concepts; (2) clearly stating the rationale for the CEA boundaries (spatial, temporal, future actions, and impact indicators); (3) delineating cause-effect relationships via linked pathways; (4) summarization of the predicted cumulative effects; and (5) reasonable justification of the significance of cumulative effects and potential mitigation strategies for negative cumulative environmental consequences.
System Investment Plan as a Tool in Adaptive Management (pdf)
Canter, L. W., and Swor, C. T.
83rd Annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., January 11-15, 2004
Environmental impact studies for water resources plans are entering a “new era” due to the need to address cumulative effects, resource and ecosystem sustainability, numerous policy and impact-related uncertainties, and the integration of economic evaluations. This paper illustrates such “new era” studies related to the on-going development of a system investment plan (SIP) to 2060 for navigation on the Ohio River. Further, the concepts of adaptive environmental management involving monitoring and feedback to continuing decision-making are described. In addition, an analysis of environmental sustainability (AES) based on the cumulative effects from past, present, and future actions along the mainstrem of the Ohio River are illustrated for water quality.
Cumulative Effects Assessment as the Integral Component of the Programmatic EIS (pdf)
Canter, L. W., and Rieger, D.
presented at the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA’05) Theme Forum entitled “The Ohio River Mainstem Systems Study (ORMSS) – A Case Study Illustrating Innovative Approaches”, May 30-June 3, 2005, Boston, Massachusetts.
The cumulative effects assessment (CEA) process can serve as a useful integrating tool for addressing the impacts of proposed and other actions at the programmatic level. Further, the environmental sustainability (ES) of affected valued environmental components (VECs) can be used as a means of assessing the significance of cumulative effects. Six needs-driven methods and approaches used in this case study include: (1) application of CEQ’s 11-step CEA process for general and detailed planning of the study; (2) collaboration with an Interagency Working Group (IWG) during CEA planning and implementation; (3) utilization of a continuous scoping process during study conduction; (4) development and use of reasonably foreseeable future action ( RFFA) matrices for identifying connections between actions and VECs, analyzing ES, and identifying follow-on ES needs, monitoring, and possible adaptive management (AM); (5) conduction of a VEC-based analysis of ES (AES) process involving identifying common effects from actions, relating these effects to indicators of ES over several time periods, and determining the relevant ES classifications; and (6) communicating the study findings based on a VEC-by-VEC presentation, coupled with a summary of cross-cutting findings.
Analysis of Environmental Sustainability Needs for the Ohio River Mainstem System Study (pdf)
Swor, C. T., Canter, L. W., Reiger, D., Hollins, E., and Harrell, L.
presented at the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA’05) Theme Forum entitled “The Ohio River Mainstem Systems Study (ORMSS) – A Case Study Illustrating Innovative Approaches”, May 30-June 3, 2005, Boston, Massachusetts.
A conceptual qualitative model for relating the effects of multiple past, present, and future actions to changes in selected indicators of Environmental Sustainability for the Valued Environmental Components is described. Practical definitions of Environmental Sustainability for water quality, freshwater mussels, and riparian resources are presented. Further, the use of Environmental Sustainability findings to delineate collaborative mitigation needs for specific Valued Environmental Components are discussed, including the use of expert groups, interacting in a non-constrained mode, wherein the focus is on the scientific and policy needs related to the Valued Environmental Component and not tied to agency responsibilities or budgetary limitations.
Monitoring and Adaptive Management – A Prospective Tool for Environmental Management (pdf)
Canter, L. W., and Hollins, E.
presented at the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA’05) Theme Forum entitled “The Ohio River Mainstem Systems Study (ORMSS) – A Case Study Illustrating Innovative Approaches”, May 30-June 3, 2005, Boston, Massachusetts
Adaptive management (AM), when accompanied by focused monitoring, can be seen as a prospective tool for water resources planning, including long-term planning for the Ohio River navigation system. Such a tool could be used to facilitate the continued, long-term operations of the navigation system in an environmentally sustainable manner. Potential key elements of an AM program include, but are not limited to, the assemblage of information on historical and current conditions, prediction of future conditions resulting from multiple projects and uses, involvement of a spectrum of stakeholder groups, use of quantitative or qualitative models, delineation of management objectives and a range of management options, development of a scientifically-designed monitoring program, and use of a decision-making framework that is responsive to the interpretation of data and inputs from various stakeholder groups and peer advisors. To serve as foundations for an AM program, several organizations and agencies already have formal and coordinating responsibilities related to Ohio River management. Further, quantitative and qualitative models also are available, and extant or planned monitoring programs are focused on aquatic ecology, environmental mapping and assessment, and mussels monitoring at multiple locations. Follow-on implementation actions include information and data surveys, establishment of a management board and peer review committee, detailed planning for monitoring, and annual usage of a decision-making framework related to adapting the management of natural resources and/or stressor actions.
|
|
|
EIA Reports - Click on the paper title to download.
This requires Adobe Acrobat Reader. Click here to download the reader.
NEPA Analysis Guidance Manual - Complete Report (pdf)
Canter, L. W., Chawla, M., and Webster, R. D.,
May 2007, U.S. Army Environmental Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.
This Manual can be used by DOD personnel and contractors as they address direct, indirect, and cumulative effects for training ranges. The Manual applies the CEQ’s 11-step CEA procedure to 14 Valued Environmental Components (VECs). Emphasis is given to the identification of existing methods and tools that can be used for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects assessments related to air quality, airspace resources, cultural resources, noise effects, soil erosion effects, threatened and endangered species, wetlands resources, water resources management, facilities, socioeconomics, energy (demand, generation, transmission, and use), land use conflicts and compatibilities, hazardous materials and hazardous wastes, and traffic and transportation systems. Finally, while the focus of the Manual is on Army activities, the general principles and approaches can be used in impact studies for numerous types of projects and activities.
Determination of Impact Significance – Principles and Examples (pdf)
Canter, L. W., and Canty, G. A.,
October 1992, Environmental and Ground Water Institute, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.
Definitions of significance and/or significant impacts are now included in the EIA guidelines or regulations of many countries and international organizations. This report summarizes a survey of such definitions resulting from American, European, and other international experiences; both generic definitions and substantive area definitions are highlighted. Traditional perspectives on significance determination have involved institutional (or governmental or regulatory), technical (or professional substantive area), and public interest considerations. A sequenced approach for impact significance determination is described, with this approach organized around ten groups of issues or questions. Examples of significance criteria pertinent to the issues are presented throughout the report.
A Tool Kit for Effective EIA Practice – Review of Methods and Perspectives on Their Application (pdf)
Canter, L., and Sadler, B.
June, 1997, International Association for Impact Assessment, Fargo, North Dakota.
The information in this report can be considered as a “tool kit” which can be used by EIA practitioners in planning and implementing impact studies. A total of 22 types of methods are described for project-level studies; their application, along with several other policy-related methods, are also addressed with reference to cumulative impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment. The most-used types of methods tend to be simpler ones, including analogs, checklists, expert opinion (professional judgment), mass balance calculations, and matrices.
|
|
