The Importance of Adequately Addressing Alternatives: Identification and Analysis in Environmental Impact Assessment

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into United States Law in 1969 for\nthe purpose of establishing the requirement for adequate environmental analysis of projects\noccurring on Federal lands or via the utilization of Federal funds. Key to this process is the\nidentification and analysis of viable and feasible alternatives to a proposed action, to include the\n“No Action Alternative,” often utilized as the baseline against which the potential effects of\nalternatives are compared (32 CFR 651.7). Screening criteria utilized to develop a proposed\naction and its alternatives must be presented in clear and concise terms, in order to ensure the\npublic and regulatory community understands the alternative development process. The\ndocument must also clearly explain why some alternatives are carried forward for detailed\nreview and analysis, while others are eliminated from further review. Recent litigation has\nhighlighted the significance of the failure to either adequately identify alternatives to a proposed\naction or to pay due attention to the No Action Alternative. Investigation and discussion of the\nalternative development and analysis process, as illustrated in several recent court cases, will be\nthe focus of this paper.