07-98
CHAPTER 11
A. Section 1506.5(c), which specifies that a consulting firm preparing an EIS
must execute a disclosure statement, does not define "financial or other
interest in the outcome of the project." The Council interprets this term
broadly to cover any known benefits other than general enhancement of
professional reputation. This includes any financial benefit such as a promise
of future construction or design work on the project, as well as indirect
benefits the consultant is aware of, (e.g., if the project would aid proposals
sponsored by the firm's other clients). For example, completion of a highway
project may encourage construction of a shopping center or industrial park
from which the consultant stands to benefit. If a consulting firm is aware
that it has such an interest in the decision on the proposal, it should be
disqualified from preparing the EIS, to preserve the objectivity and integrity
of the NEPA process. When a consulting firm has been involved in developing
initial data and plans for the project, but does not have any financial or
other interest in the outcome of the decision, it need not be disqualified
from preparing the EIS. However, a disclosure statement in the draft EIS
should clearly state the scope and extent of the firm's prior involvement to
expose any potential conflicts of interest that may exist.
17b. Q If the firm in fact has no promise of future work or other interest in
the outcome of the proposal, may the firm later bid in competition with others
for future work on the project if the proposed action is approved?
A. Yes.
18. Q. How should uncertainties about indirect effects of a proposal be
addressed, for example, in cases of disposal of federal lands, when the
identity or plans of future landowners is unknown?
A. The EIS must identify all the indirect effects that are known, and make a
good faith effort to explain the effects that are not known but are
"reasonably foreseeable." Section 1508.8(b). In the example, if there is total
uncertainty about the identity of future land owners or the nature of future
land uses, then of course, the agency is not required to engage in speculation
or contemplation about their future plans. But, in the ordinary course of
business, people do make judgments based upon reasonably foreseeable
occurrences. It will often be possible to consider the likely purchasers and
the development trends in that area or similar areas in recent years; or the
likelihood that the land will be used for an energy project, shopping center,
subdivision, farm or factory. The agency has the responsibility to make an
informed judgment, and to estimate future impacts on that basis, especially if
trends are ascertainable or potential purchasers have made themselves known.
The agency cannot ignore these uncertain, but probable, effects of its
decisions.
19a. Q. What is the scope of mitigation measures that must be discussed?
A. The mitigation measures discussed in an EIS must cover the range of impacts
of the proposal. The measures must include such things as design alternatives
that would decrease pollution emissions, construction impacts, esthetic
intrusion, as well as relocation assistance, possible land use controls that
could be enacted, and other possible efforts. Mitigation measures must be
considered even for impacts that by themselves would not be considered
"significant." Once the proposal itself is considered as a whole to have
significant effects, all of its specific effects on the environment (whether
46
Previous Page
