What is the Five Step Process for an EIS?

1. Scoping

Scoping is the first step in the EIS process.

Scoping is an open process involving the public, communities, concerned organizations, and state and federal agencies. Its purpose is to identify the major and important issues that should be considered in the EIS, including current and future transportation problems. Scoping also identifies possible options for addressing transportation problems, which should be studied in the EIS. The result of this phase is a Scoping Memorandum that records and responds to all comments and serves as the work plan for the EIS. Public and agency involvement will continue throughout the EIS process.

The process for the Circ-Williston EIS goes well beyond the single scoping meeting required by federal regulations. Three public scoping open houses [link to public meetings page] will be held to provide an opportunity for the public to learn about the EIS study and share their views on the study and the issues and transportation alternatives it should consider. VTrans is also meeting with a state and federal inter-agency group and developing cooperating agency agreements to provide input during scoping and subsequent phases of the study. Major goals of scoping include the following:

• Determine the scope of work necessary to examine and evaluate significant issues in the EIS;
• Define the Purpose and Need of the project in detail;
• Establish a long list of transportation improvement alternatives to be considered in the study;
• Identify issues that must be studied;
• Define the responsibilities of the lead and cooperating agencies in carrying out the NEPA process;
• Identify other pertinent environmental review and consultation requirements so that they may be undertaken at the same time as, or integrated with, the EIS
• Outline a schedule for preparation of the EIS in relationship to the VTrans/FHWA decision-making schedule.

(back to top)

2. Screening a Long List of Potential Project Alternatives

The consideration of all reasonable project alternatives is required by National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and provides opportunities to avoid environmental impacts. At the same time, all of the alternatives must meet the Purpose and Need of the project.

The purpose and need statement describes the basis for undertaking a project with taxpayers' money. The purpose describes the objectives of the project: what problem or problems will the project solve? The need explains the current issues driving the project: what are the safety, economic, and/or operational issues in the current situation? A clear purpose and need statement explains why the expenditure of funds is necessary and worthwhile.

After the purpose and need statement has been defined, project alternatives can be developed to address the project objectives. If an alternative does not meet the project purpose and need, or if it is clearly not feasible or has clearly unacceptable impacts, it is dropped from further consideration. If an alternative contributes to the project’s purpose and need but is not in itself sufficient to meet these objectives, it may be retained and combined with other potential alternatives; an example might be pedestrian and bicycle improvements.

The project purpose and need drives the alternatives analysis, impact analysis, and ultimate selection of a transportation alternative. Council of Environmental Quality regulations require that an EIS consider the "no-action" (also called “no-build”)alternative as well as “action” or “build” alternatives, and requires evaluation of “all reasonable alternatives." The Circ Williston EIS will therefore consider a broad range of alternatives identified during scoping as the first step in project planning.

(back to top)

3. Analyzing Environmental Impacts of a Short List of Potential Project Alternatives

The short list of project alternatives identified through the screening process will be studied in detail in the Draft EIS (DEIS). These alternatives will be subject to the intensive studies defined by project scoping and carried out within the framework of NEPA and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines for an EIS. The impact analysis will cover direct impacts, indirect impacts, construction-period impacts, and cumulative impacts of the project on the environment. Cumulative impact analysis considers the project in combination with all other planned or foreseeable projects; in the case of Circ-Williston, improvements outside the project area such as Circ-Colchester would be part of the cumulative analysis.

Specific methodologies, as approved by FHWA after input from cooperating agencies and the public, will be used to analyze impacts relative to particular resources. In the event that unavoidable significant adverse effects on any environmental resources are identified, analyses must include proposals to minimize or compensate for those impacts; such proposals are known as “impact mitigation”. NEPA also requires analysis of the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, as well as evaluation of any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources associated with the proposed action.

(back to top)

4. Preparation of the Draft EIS

The FHWA has well-established guidelines for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act in terms of both process and content of the EIS document. These guidelines include a detailed outline of topics that form the sections of the EIS. As noted under Scoping, the intent of NEPA is to focus on significant issues and avoid detailed study of topics having no issues or impacts. Therefore, the actual contents of the DEIS and amount of detail provided under each topic will vary greatly with each project. The content of a “typical” EIS, however, is presented below, as outlined in the FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (October 30, 1987), Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents.

These contents show the large span of resource topics and considerations normally evaluated in an EIS associated with FHWA-funded transportation projects. The contents also reflect the numerous mandates of NEPA – to identify the project purpose and need, to consider numerous alternatives, to evaluate a range of impacts, to integrate regulatory coordination within the document, to include concerns and comments identified by stakeholders, and to inform officials and citizens of the project.

(back to top)

At the Draft EIS stage, the results of the detailed impact studies are compared to each other and to the no-action alternative. As the DEIS objectively presents the results of the detailed impact analyses for each alternative, it also provides a framework to make these comparisons. The DEIS therefore provides the necessary information for the next step in project decision-making, to be expressed in the Final EIS (FEIS): identifying a preferred alternative.

Once compiled and approved by FHWA, the DEIS document is filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for Federal Register publication and copies are distributed and made available to federal, state, and local agencies, private organizations, and members of the public. A minimum 45-day comment period follows, during which any party may submit comments. Toward the beginning of the comment period, a public hearing is scheduled, at which comments can be submitted in hand-written and/or verbal formats.

The extent and nature of the comments received on the DEIS will drive the level of effort and areas of focus of the next stage of NEPA documentation, the FEIS. Comments may reveal the need for new or clarifying information and/or may bring to light new issues that were not identified in the DEIS but that need to be addressed to fully understand the project’s effects on the environment.

(back to top)

5. Response to Comments and Preparation of Final EIS (FEIS) With Preferred Alternative

After the DEIS comment period has closed, preparation of the FEIS may begin. Based on the comments received on the Draft EIS, a preferred alternative may be selected from those analyzed, possibly with modifications to reduce impacts or increase effectiveness; in some cases if may even be appropriate to introduce a new alternative at this stage if none of the alternatives analyzed are satisfactory.

The format of the FEIS parallels that of the DEIS, but the FEIS contains reference to and justification of the preferred alternative, updated information on the affected environment, any changes in the assessment of impacts, proposed mitigation measures, wetland and floodplain findings (pursuant to Executive Orders), the results of coordination, comments received on the DEIS, and responses to these comments. The hearing record and comments received are printed in the FEIS with specific responses to every comment.

Similar to the DEIS, after completion and approval of the FEIS, copies of the approved document are distributed and made available to federal, state, and local agencies, private organizations, and members of the public who provided substantive comments on the DEIS or who requested a copy. Distribution must be made before or at the same time that the document is filed with EPA for Federal Register publication. Distribution is followed by a minimum 30-day review period, after which the ultimate decision about the future of the project can be made. This decision is formalized in a Record of Decision (ROD) put forth by the FHWA. The ROD explains the reasons for the project decision as completely as possible, based on the information contained in the EIS.

(back to top)