Encyclopedia of Environmental Science and Engineering, Volume I and II

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS AND RELATED IMPACTS 327

Lastly, it should be appreciated that even if no expected

opposition to a project may arise, one should prepare a

document to the extent that the preparer can feel profes-

sionally comfortable with the report findings and could

testify with confidence on same under the potential of

cross-examination.

PACKAGING AND DELIVERY OF THE EIS

The packaging of the EIS generally resides with one indi-

vidual who may have written the entire EIS or may have

prepared it in concert with other professionals. The packager

must be well versed in all discipline areas involved in the

EIS to be able to edit the entire report and blend it into a

cohesive document for presentation purposes. The document

should contain an executive summary at the beginning of the

report to provide an overview of the scope of work and the

pertinent findings in the EIS.

PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN EIS PRESENTATION

Project level EIS preparation and presentation will require

at the minimum a site engineer, a traffic engineer, an archi-

tect, a planner, an attorney, and an environmental engineer

well versed in the management and development of EISs.

Depending upon the specific project and its relative com-

plexities, it may be wise to call upon other professionals

with varied backgrounds in such disciplines as zoology,

botany, archeology, hydrology, noise and air quality assess-

ment, fiscal impact analysis, socioeconomics, etc., who

may have to prepare sections of the EIS and defend and/or

support the project in the above environmental areas.

Since these experts and their findings may well determine

the viability of the project, it is important that the credentials

of these experts be recognized and respected at least in the

regions in which the development is proposed.

PRESENTATION OF THE EIS TO THE PUBLIC

The EIS should be viewed as a mechanism for “selling” the

proposal in question, and the capability of the presentors

involved in the public hearing process can greatly affect the

acceptance or rejection of the project.

The presentation should include the purpose of the EIS,

the nature of the study undertaken, basic findings from the

study including any unavoidable adverse impacts found,

and methods to be employed to mitigate the impacts. Often,

the overall findings of the EIS can be communicated to the

municipal reviewers by the person responsible in charge of

managing and packaging the EIS.

In an adversarial situation where opposing expert wit-

nesses are anticipated as well as cross-examination by an

attorney(s), it may be prudent for the applicant to have the indi-

vidual experts describe their specific contributions in the EIS

document to establish a proper record. In such instances, it is

wise for the attorney of the applicant to review the testimony of

the respective witnesses well before the public hearing so that

the presentation can be cohesive and effective. Each witness

should describe the inventory study conducted, the projections

of changes resulting from the project, comparisons of same

(where applicable) to related environmental standards, resul-

tant beneficial and/or adverse impacts generated if the pro-

posal is constructed and operated, and mitigations suggested

and/or incorporated to alleviate or minimize adverse impacts

to acceptable levels.

Because EIS documents normally must be defended at

public hearings, it is important that the witnesses have good

written and oral skills, and are well versed in expert testi-

mony proceedings.

The use of visual or summary materials is effective for

public presentations in that audiences generally can follow

visual material more closely than solely listening to speak-

ers. At times, hand-outs may be useful to highlight findings.

The visual material often aids speakers in the “flow” of

information they will be presenting through the presentation

of key headings and/or issues. It is helpful to have another

individual objectively critique the visual material prior to

presentation at the formal hearings for purposes of interpret-

ing the effectiveness of the material.

THE NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE

The Nominal Group Technique is a methodology used for site

selections which incorporates a quantitative means for differ-

entiating between alternative sites considered based upon a

weighting and scoring system of environmental factors asso-

ciated with each alternative. Although quantitative decision-

making models have been utilized in environmental assessment

reporting since the advent of NEPA, the Nominal Group

Technique is unique in that it places the decision-making in

site selection on a nominal group of citizens, usually appointed

by municipal officials, who reside in the areas that may be

ultimately impacted by the site selection process. After the

consultants have removed potential sites from consideration

based upon generally recognized exclusionary criteria (such as

wetlands, floodplains, archeologically significant sites, conser-

vation areas, farmland preservation districts, etc.), the nominal

group, with guidance from the environmental consulting firm

preparing the environmental impact report will generally per-

form the following functions in the process:

1. Develop a list of environmental factors that they
   collectively deem pertinent in the site selection
   process.


2. Develop a relative weighting of importance of
   each of the environmental factors noted above.
   The weighting is normally based upon some
   arbitrary scale (e.g., 0 to 100 with 100 being of
   greatest significance and zero indicating no sig-
   nificance). Each member provides a weighting
   figure for each environmental factor considered,
   and a weighted average value is determined for

C005_007_r03.indd 327C005_007_r03.indd 327 11/18/2005 10:23:31 AM11/18/2005 10:23:31 AM