Laserfiche WebLink
<br />National Environmenlal Policy Act ( <br /> <br />OD2258 <br /> <br />Page 3 of3 <br /> <br />has served a useful purpose; however, it has a problem with not being empowered to enforce execution of an <br />environmentally friendly plan by the agencies proposing projects, they are only required to prepare the E1S, not take the <br />best course of action for the environment. <br /> <br />10, List and discuss the subsections described in section 102(2) of NEP A, What problems can you foresee with <br />subsection (e)? <br /> <br />102(2); <br /> <br />a-b. Require new agency procedures to ensure that the decision making process takes into account environmental factors. <br />Subsections a and b require agencies to take into consideration whether their decisions regarding the current project are <br />environmentally sound, and if not, to revise those procedures until they are sound. <br />c. To force agencies to take environmental factors into consideration when making significant decisions. Included in <br />every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major Federal action significantly affecting the <br />quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on: I) The environmental impact of the <br />proposed action, II) Any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, <br />III) Alternatives to the proposed action, Requires federal agencies to consult other agencies with jurisdiction over a <br />special expertise concerning the environmental problem involved, Copies of EIS are to be circulated among the federal <br />agencies, local agencies, the President, CEQ, and the public, There is also no reference to judicial enforcement of these <br />requirements. This is good for encouraging agencies to become more informed about the environmental impact that they <br />are having on the earth due to their projects. Also, NEPA is requiring them to take environmental factors into <br />consideration during decision making, unfortunately, I suspect this is interpreted by the agencies as an evaluation of the <br />cost effectiveness of such environmentally responsible courses of action. This paperwork does not further require the <br />agency to act on its findings, they simply must be stated, The public is left with the responsibility of bringing the lawsuit <br />against the agency ifil violates their wishes or particular statutes, This is messy, mostly due to the fact that the public <br />does not have access to all ElS that are drafted, thus, effectively ruling out public involvement with federal affairs, <br />d, Found nothing <br />e. The environmental assessment must also consider alternatives to the proposed action, as required by section e. If <br />agency decided not to prepare an EIS, it must make a fmding of no significant impact available to the public, Requiring <br />the federal agency involved to list and consider more environmentally friendly alternative actions is a good, responsible <br />thing, Yet how effective can it be when leaders are not required to follow the good advice that its research tcams fmd? <br />And if all alternative courses of action are stated this meanS that the research has been done and if a lawsuit develops, <br />perhaps then the two parties can agree on a course of action listed here as determined the safest course of action. <br /> <br />http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/courses/AgEc156/nepaeisquestionsanswers.htm <br /> <br />9/21/98 <br />