eia methodoligies

8/13/2019 EIA Methodoligies

1/24

APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES


2/24

APPENDIX B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES

Name

Application

Description

Reference

Decision-Making

Variety of economic tools that assign value to projectcomponents and perceived benefits, and are used todetermine relative cost and benefit of development orproject.

Westman, W.E. 1985. Ecology, Impact Assessmentand Environmental Planning. John Wiley & Sons,

New York. 532 pp.

Decision-Making

Economic analysis that focuses on cost of providingservices and achieving objectives. The techniqueemphasizes achievement of least-cost approach.

Leistritz, F.L., and S.H. Murdock. 1981. TheSocioeconomic Impact of Resource Development:Methods for Assessment. Westview Press, Boulder,Colorado. 286pp.

Decision-Making

This socioeconomic tool involves comparison of a set of

alternatives relative to a series of decision factors arrayedon a matrix. Approaches used can include qualitative,quantitative, ranking, rating, scaling, weighing.

Canter, L. W., S. F. Atkinson, and F. L. Leistritz.1985. Impact of Growth. Lewis Publishers Inc.,Chelsea, Michigan.

Canter, L. W. 1979. Water Resources Assessment -Methodology and Technology Sourcebook. AnnArbor Science, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Scoping,Development ofAlternatives,Mitigation


3/24

These checklists are designed to be used in identifyingsignificant environmental impacts, project alternatives,and special issues associated with development projects.They are qualitative and predictive in nature. More than35 types of projects are represented, including housing,agriculture, and industrial development.

World Bank, 1991. Environmental AssessmentSourcebook. Volumes II and III.

Scoping

This is a checklist of topics intended to initiatedevelopment of a detailed scope for an EIS. The checklisthelps identify topic areas to be addressed in the EIS.

New York State Department of EnvironmentalConservation, 1982. State Environmental QualityReview Handbook.

Scoping

This checklist was designed to help identifyenvironmental impacts associated with planning, design,construction, and operation of a transportation project.

Arthur D. Little, Inc. 1971. Transportation and theEnvironment: Synthesis for Action: Impact of theNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 on theDepartment of Transportation, Vol. I-III, preparedfor the Office of the Secretary, Department ofTransportation.

Economic Tools

Cost-BenefitAnalysis

Cost-EffectivenessAnalysis

Trade-OffAnalysis

Checklists

World BankEnvironmentalImpact Checklist

Model EISscoping checklistNY DEC

Checklist of


4/24

potentialenvironmentalimpacts oftransportationproject


5/24

Matrices

Leopold Matrix

Impact Assessment

This matrix is used to identify potential impactsassociated with a project or alternatives. It assistsperforming a comprehensive review of the variety ofinteractions between project elements and environmentalparameters, to identify important environmental factors,data needs, and less damaging alternatives.

Leopold, L. B., F. E. Clarke, B. B. Hanshaw, and J.R. Balsley. 1971. A procedure for evaluatingenvironmental impact. Circular 645. U.S.Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.

Loran

Methodology(Matrix)

Impact Assessment

This method uses a matrix of 234 project activities and 27environmental features to identify critical environmentalareas. Each element in the matrix is scaled and resultsinput to an algorithm that aggregates impact scores. It isused to identify critical environmental areas.

Thompson, M. A. 1990. Determining impactsignificance in EIA: a review of 24 methodologies.

Journal ob Environmental Management 30:235-250.

Scaling or Weighing Techniques

CrawfordMethodology

Impact Assessment

Methodology was devised for use in highway routeplanning. It makes extensive use of public involvementand the Delphi Technique. The technique is used as abasis for analyzing the value trade-offs involved in a

decision between project alternatives. Results show eachalternative as a percentage of maximum possible positiveor negative impact.

Thompson, M. A. 1990. Determining impactsignificance in EIA: a review of 24 methodologies.Journal of Environmental Management 30:235-250.

PADCMethodology


6/24

Impact Assessment

This tool evaluates the significance of impacts based on 5polarities: adverse/beneficial, short/long term,reversible/irreversible, direct/indirect, local/strategic. Nonumerical method of evaluating responses is presented.


Water ResourcesAssessmentMethodology

Impact Assessment

This methodology produces scores for evaluating effectsof alternatives on specific environmental components.The methodology uses scaling and weighing methods forenvironmental social and economic components.

Thompson, M. A. 1990. Determining impact

significance in EIA: a review of 24 methodologies.Journal of Environmental Management 30:235-250.

Fischer andDavisMethodology

Impact Assessment

This method is used for determination of impact,although it does not differentiate between impactmagnitude and significance. Impacts are assigned apositive(+) or negative(-), and the degree of impact is

assigned subjectively. Designators are used to indicateshort-term or long-term impacts. Scores achieved areused to compare alternatives.



7/24

Overlay Mapping and GIS

OverlayMapping

Impact Assessment,

EnvironmentalCharacterization

This method is useful in displaying and identifying areasof environmental sensitivity, succession, development,and landscape impacts due to multiple projects.

McHarg, I. 1969. Design with Nature. NaturalHistory, New York.

GeographicInformationSystems (GIS)

Impact Assessment,EnvironmentalCharacterization

GIS consists of digitized maps and overlays that are usedto show spatial dimensions of impacts and areas ofconcern.

Westman, W. E., 1985. Ecology, Impact Assessmentand Environmental Planning. John Wiley & Sons,New York. 532 pp.

Landscape

Mapping (GIS)

Impact Analysisand Prediction

This tool is used to assess the suitability or vulnerabilityof an area for various uses.

Hopkins, L. D. 1977. Methods for generating landsuitability maps: a comparative evaluation. Journalof the American Institute of Planners 43:386-400.

Rasmussen, W. O., R. N. Weisz, P. F. Folliott, andD. R. Carder. 1980. Planning for forest roads--acomputer assisted procedure for selection ofalternative corridors. Journal of EnvironmentalManagement 11: 94-104.

GroundDisturbanceModel


8/24


9/24

disturbance and public accessibility pre-impactassessment models.

Jensen, J., and G. Gault. 1992. Electrifying theimpact assessment process. The EnvironmentalProfessional 14:50-59.


10/24

Overlay Mapping and GIS

Visibility Model

Impact Assessment

This GIS model is constructed using digital terrain dataand selected land-uses to map "viewsheds" over digitallymodeled terrain in the project study area. Resulting mapsshow visibility as distance thresholds of visualperception, and can be used by GIS impact models todetermine potential visual impacts of construction andoperation of the project.


PublicAccessibilityModel

Impact Assessment

This GIS-based tool estimates the degree of remotenessof areas along transmission line routing alternatives. Ituses GIS data on transportation and ground disturbance toestimate the increase in area accessible by roads inremote areas.


Ecological RiskAssessment


Identifies and quantifies risks to ecological receptorsfrom chemical, physical, and biological agents.Evaluates the likelihood that an adverse ecological effectwill occur as a result of exposure to contaminant ordisturbance. Uses exposure and effects models.

Suter, G. W. II 1993. Ecological Risk Assessment.Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan. 538pp.

Human HealthRisk Assessment


Provides quantitative estimates of cancer and non-cancerrisk associated with exposure to chemicals or biologicalagents. This tool includes a source/release assessment,fate and transport models, exposure assessment,


11/24


12/24

Chemical Fate and Transport Models

Fugacity Models


Numerous models used to predict fate of chemicals inmultimedia systems. Complexity varies from steady-stateto time-varying models. Outputs from these models areused in risk assessments.

Mackay, D., and S. Paterson. 1993. ExposureAssessment: Mathematical Models of transport andfate. In: Ecological Risk Assessment (ed. G.W.Suter II). Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea ,Michigan.

GEOTOX

Impact Analysis

and Prediction

This compartmental model calculates chemicalpartitioning, degrading reactions, and interphasetransport. It is used in conjunction with human exposuremodels.


ENPART


Environmental PARTitioning, a fugacity-basedscreening-level model, estimates partitioning of organicchemicals among environmental compartments, identifiesdominant pathways and data gaps, and provides estimatesof a chemical's persistence and bioconcentrationpotential.

Mackay, D., and S. Paterson. 1993. Exposure

Assessment: Mathematical Models of transport andfate. In: Ecological Risk Assessment (ed. G.W.Suter II). Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea ,Michigan.

TOXSCREEN



13/24

This time-dependent multimedia model is a screeningtool that assesses the potential for environmentaltransport and accumulation of chemicals released to theair, surface water and soil.


SIMPLESAL


This screening level multimedia fugacity compartmentalmodel is used to estimate steady-state or time dependentconcentrations of chemicals, and determine dominantenvironmental pathways and processes.

Mackay, D., and S. Paterson. 1993. ExposureAssessment: Mathematical Models of transport andfate. In: Ecological Risk Assessment (ed. G.W.

Suter II). Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea ,Michigan.

AERIS


This multimedia risk assessment model estimatesenvironmental concentrations and human exposures inthe vicinity of contaminated land sites. It is a menu-driven model with built-in default values.


Senes Consultants. 1989. Contaminated SoilCleanup in Canada, Volume 5, Development of theAERIS Model, Final Report prepared for theDecommissioning Steering Committee.


14/24


Persistence


This screening-level model is used to estimate the fate oforganic chemicals, especially pesticides, released into theaquatic environment. It provides a steady-state, fixed, ortime dependent solution using default environmentalparameters.


EXAMS


Exposure Analysis Modeling System. This is a mass-balance model that predicts the fate of organic chemicalsin stratified surface waters as a result of continuous orintermittent releases.


Burns, L. A., D. M. Cline, and R. R. Lassiter. 1981.Exposure Analysis Modeling Systems (EXAMS):User Manual and System Documentation. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, EnvironmentalResearch Laboratory, Athens, Georgia.

EXWAT


This is a steady-state model used to describe chemical

fate in water bodies and assess comparative hazards. It isapplicable to continuous single-point sources.


Metal Speciation


15/24

Models


Models such as MINTEQAI are used to determineequilibrium speciation of metals in surface andgroundwaters. Outputs include equilibrium aqueousspeciation, adsorption, gas-phase partitioning, solid-phasesaturation states and precipitation-dissolution states.

Brown, D. S., and J. D. Allison. 1987. MINTEQAIEquilibrium Metal Speciation Model: A UsersManual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens,Georgia.


16/24


Fish Uptake andFood ChainModels


Variety of models used to estimate concentrations ofchemicals in aquatic biota.


Thomann, R. V. 1989. Bioaccumulation model oforganic chemical distribution in aquatic food chains.Environmental Science and Technology 23:699-707.

Clark, K. E., F.A.P.C. Gobas, and D. Mackay. 1990.Model of organic chemical uptake and clearance byfish from food and water. Environmental Scienceand Technology 24:1203-1213.

Connell, D. W. 1989. Bioaccumulation ofXenophobic Compounds. CRC Press, Boca Raton,Florida.

Soil Models


Models used to predict fate and transport of chemicals insoil. Model outputs are used in risk assessment.

Bonazountas, M., and J. M. Wagner. 1984. SESOIL- A seasonal soil compartment model. Arthur D.Little Co., Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Carsel, R. F., C. N. Smith, L. A. Mulkey, J. D. Dean,and P. Jowise. 1984. Users Manual for thePesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM). EPA-600/3-84-109. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens,Georgia.


17/24

Enfield, G. C., R. F. Carsel, S. Z. Cohen, T. Phon,and D. M. Walters. 1982. Approximating pollutanttransport to groundwater. Ground Water 20:711-727.

Jury, W. A., W. F. Spencer, and W. J. Farmer. 1983.Behavior assessment model for trace organics in soil.Journal of Environmental Quality 12:558-564.

AtmosphericModels


Variety of models used to calculate ground-levelconcentrations of chemicals from emission sources.Model outputs are used in risk assessment.

Mackay, D., and S. Paterson. 1993. ExposureAssessment: Mathematical Models of transport and

fate. In: Ecological Risk Assessment (ed. G.W.Suter II). Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea ,Michigan.


18/24


HabitatEvaluationModels


This refers to a variety of models that are used to developa quantitative index value for existing habitats, anddetermine change in that index resulting from the project.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).1993. Habitat Evaluation: Guidance for the Reviewof Environmental Impact Assessment Documents.

Farmer A. 1980. Habitat Evaluation Procedures(HEP). ESM 102. Division of Ecological Sciences,U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

Farmer, A. 1981. Standards for the Development ofHabitat Suitability Index Models. ESM 103.Division of Ecological Sciences, U.S. Fish andWildlife Service, Washington D.C.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 1987. Type Btechnical information documents PB88-100128-PB88-100169.

Atkinson, S. F. 1990. A simplified habitatevaluation for use with remote sensing data. TheEnvironmental Professional 12:122-130.

SensitivityAnalysis

Decision Making

This technique identifies the parameter or variable of amodel that is most sensitive to change. Use of thistechnique helps modelers and decision-makersunderstand how changes to input of an analysis affectsthe predicted impact of a proposed action.

Jorgensen, S. E. 1991. Environmental managementmodeling. In: Introduction to EnvironmentalManagement (eds. P. E. Hansen and S. E.Jorgensen). Elsevier, New York. 403 pp.


19/24

Expert Systems


Expert systems refer to programs developed using IF-THEN codes. There is no reference to specific expertsystems used for the EA process.

Lein, J. 1989. An expert system approach toenvironmental impact assessment. InternationalJournal of Environmental Studies 33:13-27.

Lein, J. K. 1993. Formalizing expert judgement inthe environmental impact assessment process. TheEnvironmental Professional 15: 95-102.

Computer-AidedEnvironmentalImpactAssessment

Impact Assessment

This conceptual model provides a general outline fordevelopment of computer-aided environmental impactassessment. It has not been developed into a usefulprogram. The tool is intended for use in evaluatingdifferent environmental components and costs ofmitigation measures.

Luhar, A. K., and P. Khanna. 1988. Computer-aidedrapid environmental impact assessment.Environmental Impact Assessment Review 8:9-25.

Field Studies


20/24


FieldReconnaissance

ImpactIdentification

This tool consists of a qualitative reconnaissance of fieldconditions and is used to confirm and complementinformation provided in literature and backgrounddocumentation.

Krebs, C.J. 1989. Ecological Methodology. Harper& Row, NY. 654 pp.

Smith, R. 1966. Ecology and Field Biology. Harper& Row, NY. 686 pp.

Field Survey

ImpactIdentification,BaselineCharacterization

This tool consists of a variety of techniques designed toaddress particular endpoints and objectives. Complexitycan also vary based on study objectives. Environmentalfield studies document environmental conditions andtrends.

Suter, G. 1993. Ecological Risk Assessment. LewisPublishers, Chelsea, MI. 538 pp.

LaboratoryTesting

Impact Analysisand Identification

This tool consists of establishing testing protocols, ormicrocosms that model processes in the field. Results areused to predict impacts of actions on endpoints selected.Testing protocols vary because of the multitude ofpotential endpoints and test parameters.

Sourcebook for the EA Process

Additional Assessment Tools/Techniques

Ad HocProcedures



21/24

Qualitative tool used to assemble information, comparealternative sites, and develop strategy

Sourcebook for the EA Process

ProfessionalJudgement


Qualitative tool involving an experiencedmultidisciplinary team. Professional Judgement is usedto design an EA, evaluate and select methods/models,determine relevance of data, develop assumptions to filldata gaps, interpret predicted/observed effects.

Lein, J. K. 1993. Formalizing expert judgment in theenvironmental impact assessment process. TheEnvironmental Professional 15:95-102.

Analog Studies/Case Studies


This tool involves the use of information from studiesthat are analogous to the project being evaluated by virtueof geography, action, etc. It assumes that observedimpacts at the analog site will be similar to the study site.

National Research Council. 1986. EcologicalKnowledge and Environmental Problem-Solving:Concepts and Case Studies. National ResearchCouncil, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Public Opinion

Scoping, IssueIdentification,Impact Analysis,Determination ofSignificance

This qualitative tool helps to identify and determine therelative significance of environmental impacts. It isbased on providing information to the public on theproposed action, alternatives and potential impacts.


Regulations,Guidelines andThresholds

Determination ofSignificance


22/24


23/24


24/24