Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I. <br />I <br /> <br />ES ENGINEERING.SCIENCE <br /> <br />COST IMPLICATIONS <br /> <br />The costs of preparing NEPA-compliance documents and mitigation planning <br />and implementation measures are discussed separately in the following sections. <br />Costs can vary dramatically depending on several important variables, including site <br />characteristics, public interest and scoping issues, project complexity and scope, <br />controversiality of perceived impacts, mitigation alternatives and measures, existing <br />database, and time. The following cost estimates are order-of-magnitude estimates <br />based on experience conducting NEPA-related studies, preparing environmental <br />documents, and providing technical mitigation planning and implementation <br />services for clients. <br /> <br />Environmental Assessments and/or Impact Statements <br /> <br />As was discussed earlier, it is expected that a formal proposal to the Corps to <br />store additional water in the reservoir would require preparation of an EA The <br />findings of an EA leads the Corps to making one of two decisions, each of which has <br />a different project costs. If the EA conclusions support a finding of no significant <br />impacts (FONSI) and if the findings are not contested during public reviews, then <br />the EA process usually ends with the Corps deciding whether to approve the project, <br />preparing a FONSI, and issuing its decision as a record of decision. The cost of this <br />scenario can generally range from $30,000 to $60,000. However, if the EA findings <br />are contested and require additional work to supplement or strengthen the reasons <br />for conclusions of no effect, then the cost increases and typically can range from <br />$50,0000 to $100,000. <br /> <br />Actual costs obviously would be driven by the nature, number, and reasons for <br />disagreeing with the EA findings. As a general rule, the higher the degree of <br />controversy and the more diverse the issues that need to be addressed in detail, the <br />higher the cost. The previous EA cost ranges only address activities associated with <br />preparing a technically and legally defensible EA, and not the associated legal and <br />special technical study costs typically associated with addressing controversial topics <br />on a technical basis. A reasonable planning guideline for scheduling an average EA <br />is 10 to 12 months. <br /> <br />If the findings of an EA suggest that significant adverse environmental impacts <br />are likely, then the next procedural step is typically either to stop consideration of <br />the proposal or to move forward into the formal EIS process. The typical total cost <br />of preparing a Corps final EIS for a water resource project can range from $350,000 <br />to $600,000. Obviously, some economics or cost savings are realized from having <br />previously compiled the existing databases for the EA However, such savings may <br />not be significant once the additional new costs of conducting formal public <br />participation scoping; document reproduction; new technical studies; and <br />procedural delays are factored in. The estimated cost range includes the standard <br />EIS proceriural steps of scoping; developing the existing environment data and <br />information bases; analyzing the impacts of the alternatives; developing acceptable <br />conceptual mitigation measures; coordinating with the client, contractor, and <br />regulatory agencies; preparing the draft and final EIS documents; planning and <br />team management activities; and revising analyses and documents. <br /> <br />-17- <br /> <br />816-3-3 <br />