Impact Assessment

ISSN: 0734-9165 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tiap19

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

L. W. Canter

To cite this article: L. W. Canter (1982) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, Impact

Assessment, 1:2, 6-40, DOI: 10.1080/07349165.1982.9725447

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/07349165.1982.9725447

Published online: 06 Feb 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3303

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tiap20
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
L.W. Canter*
Over 14,000 environmental impact statements (EISs) have
been prepared in the United States since the January 1,1970 ef-
fective date of the National Environmental Policy Act (Public
Law 91-190). In addition, the number of prepared environmen-
tal impact assessments (EIAs) exceeds, by a t least a n order of
magnitude, the number of EISs. An EIA refers to a document
that provides sufficient analysis for determining whether to
prepare a n EIS or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).
The basic purpose of NEPA is to ensure that the environment is
considered in project planning and decision-making along with
traditional technical factors and economic analyses. The 1979
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations gave
emphasis to using scientific approaches and techniques in im-
pact prediction and analysis (Council on Environmental
Quality, 1978). This emphasis was due, in part, to the fact that
many EIAs and EISs prepared during the 1970s were lacking in
scientific approach.
The purpose of this paper is to identify scientific methods
and techniques which can be used in environmental impact
studies. A complete review of applicable approaches is beyond
the scope of this paper, therefore, only examples will be cited. A
framework for the conduct of environmental impact studies is
shown in Figure 1 (Canter, 1977). Key elements include basic
activities, preparation of a description of the affected environ-
ment, impact prediction and assessment, selection of the
preferred action from alternative plans based on environmental
effects and other considerations, and appropriate environmen-
tal documentation through the writing of an EIA or EIS.

BASIC ACTIVITIES
Basic activities include the formulation of alternatives for
meeting identified needs and the thorough review of ap-
propriate laws, regulations, and executive orders. There are

*Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and

Co-Director, National Center for Ground Water Research, Un-
iversity of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.

6
 Basic > Impact Prediction Selection of Wr i t t en
Activities and Assessment Proposed Action- Documentation
-
T
Description of
Affected Environment

Figure 1: Framework f o r Envirorimental Impact Studies

over 30 federal laws, regulations, and executive orders which
must be considered in the preparation of EIAs or EISs. Another
aspect is the formation of an interdisciplinary study team ap-
propriate for each study in each geographical location. Inter-
disciplinary study teams should include persons who can ad-
dress impacts on the physical and chemical, biological,
cultural, and socio-economic environments (U.S. Soil Conser-
vation Service, 1977). Basic activities also include the iden-
tification of potential environmental impacts from alternative
plans. Several approaches can be utilized, including literature
reviews on the environmental consequences of similar projects
(Canter, 1980), and the development of interaction matrices or
networks. Interaction matrices are directed toward identifying
the potential impacts of project features on identified environ-
mental factors (Leopold, 1971; Fischer and Davies, 1973;
Bhutani, et al., 1975; Yorke, 1978; Baram and Webster, 1979).
Networks refer to structured approaches in which initial and
subsequent environmental changes are linearly displayed
(Sorenson, 1971; Whitlich, 1976; and U.S. Soil Conservation
Service, 1977).

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
The second element is the preparation of a description of the
affected environment for the potential area of influence. This
requires identification of environmental factors and their
organization into physical-chemical, biological, cultural, and
socio-economic components. Numerous checklists of environ-
mental factors are available (Dee, et al., 1972; Carstea, et al.,
1975; Voorhees and Associates, 1975; Fitzsimmons, Stuart, and
Wolff, 1975; Duke, et al., 1977; Canter and Hill, 1979). Major
tasks include the procurement of existing baseline information
as well as the planning and conduct of necessary field studies.
Table 1 lists example references on data sources and planning.
An important need is to recognize interrelationships among en-
vironmental factors; one approach is to use indices for air and
water quality, and biological and socio-economic features
(Inhaber, 1976; Ott, 1978).

IMPACT PREDICTION AND ASSESSMENT

The most important technical element involves the predic-

7
tion of changes in environmental factors resulting f r o 6 alter7
native plans, and the interpretation and assessment of their
significance. Every attempt should be made to quantify an-
ticipated changes and to use scientific rationale for significance
assessment. Impact prediction and assessment can be con-
sidered relative to environmental components, and within the
physical-chemical component are mathematical models for
predicting changes in air, water, and noise quality as well as
other geological or physical features. Table 2 lists some example
references for various models. Assessment of impact
significance can be based on environmental standards for air,
water, and noise quality; and the exercise of professional judg-
ment.
Biological impact prediction is primarily based on habitat or
land use changes or more sophisticated approaches such as the
Habitat Evaluation Procedure (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1980) and the Habitat Evaluation System (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 1980). A key limitation is the absence of techniques
for quantifying habitat changes, particularly when considering
long-term effects. Highly sophisticated approaches involve the
use of energy systems diagrams, although this technique is not
widely used due to data, personnel, and resource requirements.
Significance interpretation should be based on appropriate
laws, regulations, and executive orders as well as the applica-
tion of ecological principles and professional judgement. Table
3 lists some example references for biological impact prediction
and assessment.
Impact prediction and assessment for the cultural environ-
ment involves eonsideration of changes in historic and
archeological resources as well as cultural attributes such as
visual quality. Several methodologies exist for describing the
visual quality of an area, and, by use of conceptual drawings
and photographs, these same methodologies can be used to
quantify and evaluate project-induced changes in visual
quality. Table 4 identifies some example references for the
cultural environment.
Socio-economic impact prediction can be based on models
ranging from simple extrapolation techniques to complicated
econometric approaches. Interpretation of changes can be
based on recommended standards or criteria, geographical

8
averages, and the relationship of the information to original
design standards or concepts (Voorhees and Associates, 1975;
Fitzsimmons, Stuart,-and Wolff, 1975; Chalmers and Anderson,
1977). Table 5 lists some example references for socio-economic
impact prediction and assessment.

SELECTION OF PROPOSED ACTION

Selection of the proposed action from a series of alternative
plans represents the focal element in the environmental impact
process. Systematic methodologies should be used to compare
alternatives; many methodologies involve multiple criteria
decision-making wherein decision factors are assigned impor-
tance weights and each alternative is evaluated based on each
decision factor. Alternatives can be scaled or ranked from best
to worst in terms of each of the decision factors, with a final
decision matrix used for displaying the results. Table 6 iden-
tifies some methodologies which can be useful in the selection
process. Several types of alternatives should be considered, in-
cluding site locations, timing alternatives, various design
features of specific alternatives a t specific locations, and no ac-
tion (Council on Environmental Quality, 1978).

DOCUMENTATION
The final element is the preparation of written documenta-
tion. Appropriate technical writing principles should be utilized
in the preparation of either an EIA or EIS. One of the best aids
is the development of an extensive outline prior to initiating the
writing process. Liberal usage should be made of visual display
materials such as maps, photographs, tables, and figures.
Glossaries of technical terms can also be useful in documenta-
tion. Scientific referencing should be utilized for procured en-
vironmental setting information as well as impact prediction
techniques.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
Numerous scientific methods and techniques are available
for usage in environmental impact studies; however they have
not been extensively used due to one or more of the following
reasons: (1)minimal emphasis on their use until the 1979 CEQ
regulations; (2) information gap due to lack of knowledge of

9
available approaches on the part of many practitioners; (3)
non-existence of current technology during the early years of
the decade of the 1970s; and (4) general reluctance to use ap-
proaches which 3re perceived to be time and cost consuming.
Usage of scientific methods and techniques is expected to in-
crease due to the 1979 CEQ regulations and the growing
emphasis on public participation. Active public participation
programs encourage practitioners to utilize the most ap-
propriate methods and techniques in environmental impact
studies. In fact, public participation undergirds all elements in
the framework for environmental impact studies. Appropriate
public participation techniques should be selected based on the
objectives of the public participation effort, the potential
publics to be involved, and the communication characteristics
of individual techniques relative to objectives and publics
(Bishop, 1975). Another reason for an increasing usage of scien-
tific methods and techniques is the increasing knowledge base
for conduct of environmental impact studies.
One of the long-term benefits of the environmental impact
process is that needed research continues to be identified by
agencies. This directed research should lead to cost reductions
in project planning as a result of new information on the en-
vironmental effects of various project types. Some research
needs related to environmental impact studies are listed in
Table 7. Only the first two items will be addressed from the
non-prioritized listing. Post-audit analysis refers to studies
needed to verify whether or not predicted impacts actually oc-
curred, and if their magnitudes match those that were an-
ticipated. If post-audit analyses can be made, this will enable
better conduct of future studies since the approaches can be
calibrated to more accurately reflect anticipated impacts.
Value judgments are used throughout the enviromental impact
process, and research is needed to better understand and in-
tegrate value judgments within the process.
Finally, environmental impact studies should be based on
the use of a systematic framework and approach. There is no
substitute for the application of the scientific process and ap-
propriate technology in environmental impact studies. These
studies must be founded on these principles in order to achieve
an appropriate consideration of the environment in project
planning and decision-making.

10
TABLE 1: EXAMPLES OF REFERENCES ON STUDIES
OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Topical Area Reference

Data Sources Golden, et al. (1979)-

Data reference book for
environmental impact
studies.

Keown and Weathersby

(1976)-Catalog of in-
formation sources for en-
vironmental baseline
description.

Meyers, Fake, and Au-

sura (1977)-Directory
of major environmental
data bases maintained
by federal agencies.

Naval Environmental
Support Office (1976)-
Sources of environment-
al information are listed,
including federal and
California state sources.

Van Weringh, e t al. (1975)

-Collection of Environ-
mental laws, regulations,
and standards.

11
Study Planning Burns (1978)-Proceed-
ings of symposium on
planning for environ-
mental impact studies.

Rau and Wooten (1980)-

Comprehensive hand-
book for conducting en-
vironmental impact
studies.

States, et al. (1978)-

Planning for ecological
baseline studies.

Stout, et al. (1978)-Plan-

ning for integrated
baseline studies of the
environment.

Ward (1978)-Book on
planning, conducting,
and interpreting bio-
logical impact studies.

12
TABLE 2: EXAMPLES OF REFERENCES ON IMPACT
PREDICTION A N D ASSESSMENT FOR THE
PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL ENVIRONMENT

Topical Area Reference

Air Busse and Zimmerman

(1973)-Discussion of
climatological disper-
sion model (CDM).

Turner (1970)-Work-
book of atmospheric
dispersion calculations
from multiple source
types.

U.S. Environmental Pro-

tection Agency (1977)
-Discussion of single-
source, steady-state
Gaussian plume dis-
persion model.

Surface Water Brown (1979)-221 ab-

stracts on the hydro-
dynamics and model-
ing of heated effluents.

Nemorow (1974)-Book
on modeling water
quality resulting from
organic pollution.

13
 Orlob (1977)-Literature
review of mathematic-
al modeling of surface
water impoundments.

Ozturk (1979)-Model of
dissolved oxygen in es-
tuaries.

Velz (1970)-Book on
modeling water quality
resulting from organic,
inorganic, thermal,
and bacterial pollution.

Ground Water Hammer and MacKichan

(1981)-Overview of
quantity and quality
aspects of surface and
ground water.

Prickett (1979)-Sum-
mary of ground water
modeling techniques.

Non-Point Pollution Overton (1977)-Model-

ing of effects of land
use changes on stream-
flow quantity and qual-
ity.

14
 U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (1976)
-Procedures for pre-
dicting impacts of ur-
ban stormwater.

Walker (1976)-Litera-
ture review of irriga-
tion return flow models.

Noise Kessler, e t al. (1978)-

Evaluation of con-
struction site noise.

Magrab (1975)-Book on
noise prediction from
variety of source types.

TABLE 3: EXAMPLES OF REFERENCES ON IMPACT

PREDICTION A N D ASSESSMENT FOR THE
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

Topical Area Reference

Habitat Approaches U.S. Army Corps of En-

gineers (198O)--Sys-
tematic methodology
for aquatic and terres-
trial ecosystem evalua-
tions.

15
 U.S, Fish and Wildlife
Service (1980)-Proce-
dural manual for es-
timating and compar-
ing development pro-
ject impacts on fish
and wildlife resources.

Ecosystem Models Gilliland and Risser

(1977)-Systems dia-
grams and energy flow
analysis of activities
a t White Sands Mis-
sile Range.

Green (1978)-Model for

the Chesapeake Bay
ecosystem with sub-
models on wetlands,
plankton, seagrasses ,
other benthos, and fish
trophic levels.

Najarian and Harleman

(1977)-Model of nitro-
gen-cycle dynamics in
an estuarine system.

O’Neill, Ferguson, and

Watts (1977)-946 re-
ferences on mathema-
tical modeling, with
emphasis on forest bi-
omes.

16
 Ostrofsky and Duthie
(1978)-Methodology
for modeling productiv-
ity in reservoirs.

Veith, Defoe, and Berg-

stedt (1979)-Model for
estimating bioconcen-
tration of organic
chemicals in fish.

Walker and Bayley

(1978)-Quantification
of the contribution of
natural ecosystems to
man’s economy in be-
nefit - cost analysis.

Assessment Bovee and Cochnauer

(1977)-Methodology
using weighted criteria
to assess impacts on
stream habitats.

Fletcher and Busnel

(1978)-Book summa-
rizing effects of noise
on aquatic and terres-
trial wildlife.

Mueller (1977)-Discus-
sion of burdening ca-
pacity of ecosystems.

17
 Perez (1978)-Discussion
of persistence limits in
ecological systems.

Sharma (1975)-Confer-
ence proceedings on
determining the sig-
nificance of biological
impacts.

Stalnaker and Arnette

(1976)-Methodologies
for determining in-
stream flow require-
ments for fish, terres-
trial wildlife, and wa-
ter quality.

T m L E 4: EXAMPLES OF REFERENCES ON I M P E T
PREDICTION A N D A S S E S S M E N T FOR THE
CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

Topical Area Reference

Historical and Archeolog- Dickens and Hill (1978)

ical Resources -16 papers on cultural
resources planning and
management.

King (1978)-Description
of methods for con-
ducting archeological
surveys.
18
Visual Quality Bagley, Kroll, and Clark
(1973)-Review of 12
methodologies for
measuring or quan-
tifying aesthetics.

Felleman (1975)-Review
of numerical, geomet-
ric, and geomorphic
landform description
approaches for eval-
uating scenic quality.

Harper (1975)-Use-ori-
ented method for visual
quality evaluation of
the coastal zone.

U S . Bureau of Land
Management (19783)-
Description of visual
resource contrast ra-
ting system.

U.S. Bureau of Land

Management (1978b)-
Description of method
for upland visual re-
source inventory and
evaluation.

U.S. Forest Service

(1974)-Description of
visual management
system used for the

19
 Forest Service studies
in the northwestern
United States.

U S . Soil Conservation
Service (1978)-De-
scription of procedure
for landscape resource
quality.

TABLE 5: EXAMPLES OF REFERENCES ON IMPACT

PREDICTION FOR THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRON-
MENT

Topical Area Reference

General Approaches Daneke and Delli Pris-
coli (1979)-Discussion
of quality of life ac-
counting met hodolo-
gies.

Finsterbush and Wolf

(1977)-Book on meth-
odologies for social im-
pact assessment.

Frendeway, Monarchi,
and Taylor (1977)-
Model for regional im-
pacts of population,
employment, manufac-
turing, commerce, and
service industries.
20
 Shapiro, Luecks, and
Kuhner (1978)-Eval-
uation of the infra-
structure requirements
resulting from secon-
dary development.

Specific Projects Chalmers and Anderson

(1977)-Methodology
for prediction of eco-
nomic and demogra-
phic impacts of water
resources projects.

Christiansen (1976)-
Methodology for ad-
dressing social impacts
of land development
projects.

FitzPatrick , et al. (1977)

-Methodology for e-
valuation of the secon-
dary impacts of waste-
water treatment facili-
ties.

Fitzsimmons, Stuart,
and Wolf (1975)-
Methodology for de-
velopment of social
well-being account for
water resources pro-
jects.

21
Guldberg and D’Agos-
tino (1978)-Total air
pollutant emissions
from induced develop-
ment from a waste-
water project.

Muller (1975)-Method-
ology for addressing
fiscal impacts of land
development projects.

Muller (1976)-Method-
ology for addressing
economic impacts of
land development pro-
jects.

Mumphrey, Thayer, and

Wagner (1977)-Socio-
economic impacts from
outer continental shelf
oil and gas develop-
ment.

Willeke (1978)-Socio-
economic impacts from
wastewater manage-
ment plans.

22
TABLE 6: EXAMPLES OF METHODOLOGIES FOR
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES AND SELECTION
OF PROPOSED ACTION

Methodology Reference

Matrices Phillips and DeFilippi

(1976)-Matrix analy-
sis and narrative de-
scription for waste-
water management
system.

Schwind (1977)-Matrix
used to evluate im-
pacts of alternative
land uses in terms of
cost-benefit approach-
es.

Sellers and North (1979)

-Matrix for evalua-
tion of trade-offs be-
tween economic and
environmental objec-
tives in water resour-
ces planning.

Tamblyn and Cederborg

(1975)-Matrix for nu-
clear power plant site
selection.

23
Checklists Ahmed, Husseiny, and
Cho (1979)-Checklist
for development of in-
dex of site acceptabil-
ity for nuclear power
plants.

Burnham, Nealey, and

Maynard (1975)-
Weighting checklist for
combining societal and
technical judgements
relative to nuclear
power plant siting.

Coastal Environments,
Inc. (1976)-Checklist
for evaluating on-shore
impacts from off-shore
oil and gas develop-
ment.

Gertz (1978)-Ranking
checklist coupled with
non-parametric statis-
tical analysis.

Sondheim (1978)-Sca-
ling checklist for eval-
uation of a proposed
dam project.

Modeling Hill (1976)-Resource

allocation model for
evaluation of waste-

24
 water management al-
ternatives.

Lavine (1979)-Energy a-
nalysis model for con-
ducting environmental
cost-benefit analyses
for transportation ac-
tions.

Schrender, Rustagi, and

Bare (1976)-Simula-
tion models for eval-
uating the impacts of
alternative wildland-
use decisions.

Miscellaneous Babb and Hickey (1978)

-Use of computer
graphics for evaluation
of impacts from con-
ventional energy sys-
tems.

Duckstein, et al. (1977)-

Methodology for inclu-
ding uncertainty in en-
vironmental impact as-
sessment.

Hydrologic Engineering
Center (1978)-Use of
grid cell banks in en-
vironmental impact as-
sessment.

25
 Keeney (1976)-Decision-
making using multi-
attribute utility tech+
niques.

Rubinstein and Horn

(1978)-Methodology
for including risk ana-
lysis in environmental
impact assessment.

TABLE 7: RESEARCH NEEDS IN ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT' STUDIES
Post-Audit Analysis

Value Judgment Approaches

Techniques for Impact Prediction and Assessment

Substantive Areas of Increasing Importance

(acid rain, ground water, wetlands, energy development)

Decision-Making Techniques

Public Participation Techniques

Benefits and Costs of Environmental Impact Studies

Procedures for Systematic Review of EIS's

26
 SELECTED REFERENCES
Ahmed, S., Husseiny, A.A., and Cho, H.Y. (1979). Formal
Methodology for Acceptability Analysis of Alternate Sites for
Nuclear Power Stations, Nuclear Engineering Design, 51,
361-388.

Babb, M.C. and Hickey, H.R., Jr. (1978). Applications of Com-

puter Graphics to Inregrated Environmental Assessments of
Energy Systems, TVA/EP-78/10, Tennessee Valley Authority,
Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Bagley, M.D., Kroll, C.A., and Clark, C. (1973). Aesthetics in

Environmental Planning, EPA-600/5-73-009, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Baram, R. and Webster, R.D. (1979). Interactive Environmental

Impact Computer System (EICS) User Manual, CERL-TR-
N-80, U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Labor-
atory, Champaign, Illinois.

Bhutani, J., et al. (1975). Impacts of Hydrologic Modification

on Water Quality, EPA-600/2-75-007, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Bishop, A.B. (1975). Structuring Communications Programs for

Public Participation in Water Resources Planning, IWR
Contract Report 75-2, U.S. Army Engineer Institute for Water
Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

Bovee, K.D. and Cochnauer, T. (1977). Development and

Evaluation of Weighted-Criteria, Probability-of-Use Curve
for lnstream Flow Assessments: Fisheries, Report No.
FWS/OBS-77/63, IFIP-3, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort
Collins, Colorado.

27
Brown, R.J. (1979). Thermal Pollution, Part 3. Hydrology and
Hydrodynamics (A Bibliography with Abstracts), National
Technical Information Service, U S . Department of Com-
merce, Springfield, Virginia.

Burnham, J.B., Nealey, S.M., and Maynard, W.S. (1975).

Method for Integrating Societal and Technical Judgements in
Environmental Decision Making, Nuclear Technology, 25,
675-681.

Burns, E.A. (1978). Symposium Proceedings of Process

Measurments for Environmental Assessment, held in Atlanta,
on February 13-15. Final Task report, April, 1977-February
1978, EPA/600/7-78/168, TRW Systems Group, Redondo
Beach, California.

Busse, A.D. and Zimmerman, J.R. (1973). User’s Guide for the
Climatological Dispersion Model, Environmental Monitoring
Series EPA-R4-73-024, NERC, .EPA, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina.

Canter, L.W. (1977). Environmental Impact Assessment,

McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 20-29.

Canter, L.W. (1980). Review of Current Literature on Environ-

mental Impact Studies for Water Resources Projects, Uni-
versity of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma (report submitted
to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi).

Canter, L.W. and Hill, L.G. (1979). Handbook of Variables for

Environmental Impact Assessment, Ann Arbor Science Pub-
lishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.

28
Carstea, D. et al. (1975). Guidelines for the Environmental
Impact Assessment of Small Structures and Related Activities
in Coastal Bodies of Water, MTR-6916, Rev. 1, The Mitre
Corporation, McLean, Virginia.

Chalmers, J.A. and Anderson, E.J. (1977). Economic/Demo-

graphic Assessment Manual: Current Practices, Procedural
Recommendations, and a Test Case, Engineering and
Research Center, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver,
Colorado.

Christiansen, K. (1976). Social Impacts of Land Development,

URI 15700, The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C.

Coastal Environments, Inc. (1976). A Process for Coastal

Resources Management and Impact Assessment, report to
Louisiana State Planning Office, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Council on Environmental Quality, National Environmental

Policy Act-Regulations, Federal Register, Vol. 43, No. 230,
November 29, 55978-56007.

Daneke, G.A. and Delli Priscoli, J. (1979). Social Assessment

and Resource Policy: Lessons from Water Planning, Natural
Resources Journal, 19, 359-375.

Dee, N., et al. (1972). Environmental Evaluation System for

Water Resources Planning, Final Report, Battelle-Columbus
Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio.

Dickens, R.S., Jr. and Hill, C.E., eds. (1978). Cultural

Resources-Planning and Management, Westview Press,
Boulder, Colorado.

29
Duckstein, L., et al. (1977). Practical Use of Decision Theory
to Assess Uncertainties about Actions Affecting the Environ-
ment, Completion Report, Department of Systems and
Industrial Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson,
Arizona.

Duke, K.M., et al. (1977). Environmental Quality Assessment in

Multiobjective Planning, Final Report to U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, Denver, Colorado.

Fellemen, J.P. (1975). Coastal Landforms and Scenic Analysis:

A Review, Proceedings, the First Annual Conference of the
Coastal Society, November 1975, Arlington, Virginia, State
University of New York, College of Environmental Science
and Forestry, Syracuse, New York, 203-217.

Finsterbush, K. and Wolf, C.P. (1977). T h e Methodology of

Social Impact Assessment, Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross
Publishing Co., Stroudsberg, Pennsylvania.

Fischer, D.W. and Davies, G.S. (1973). An Approach to

Assessing Environmental Impacts, Journal of Environmental
Management, 1, 207-227.

FitzPatrick, M., et al. (1977). Manual for Evaluating Secondary

Impact of Waste Water Treatment Facilities, Report
No. EPA-600/5-78-003, Abt Associates, Inc., Cambridge,
Massachusetts.

Fitzsimmons, S.J., Stuart, L.I., and Wolf, P.C. (1975).

Social Assessment Manual-A Guide to the Preparation of the
Social Well-Being Account, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver,
Colorado.

30
Fletcher, J.L. and Busnel, R.G. (1978). Effects of Noise on
Wildlife, Academic Press, New York.

Frendeway, J.O., Jr., Monarchi, D.E., and Taylor, R.H. (1977).

Evaluation of the Regional Activities Model (RAM) Developed
a t the Center for the Environment and Man, Inc.,
NSF/RA-770372, Business Research Division, University of
Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.

Gertz, S.M. (1978). Use of Ranking Methods to Assess

Environmental Data, ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 652, Sympo-
sium on Biological Data in Water Pollution Assessment:
Quantitative and Statistical Analyses, Minneapolis, Min-
nesota, June 20-21, 1977, ASTM, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
68-77.

Gilliland, M.W. and Risser, P.G. (1977). The Use of Systems

Diagrams for Environmental Impact Assessment: Procedures
and an Application, Ecological Modeling, 3, 183-199.

Golden, J., et al. (1979). Environmental Impact Data Book, Ann

Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Green, K.A. (1978). A Conceptual Ecological Model for

Chesapeake Bay, FWS/OBS-78/69, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, D.C.

Guldberg, P.H. and D’Agostino, R.B. (1978). Growth Effects

of Major Land Use Projects (Waste Water Facilities) Vol-
ume 11. Summary, Predictive Equations, and Worksheets,
Report No. EPA/450/3-78/014B, U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Hammer, M.J. and MacKichan, K.A. (1981). Hydrology and
Quality of Water Resources, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Harper, D.B. (1975). Focusing on Visual Quality of the

Coastal Zone, Proceedings, The First Annual Conference of
the Coastal Society, Novem ber 1975, Arlington, Virginia,
State University of New York, College of Environmental
Science and Forestry, Syracuse, New York, 218-224.

Hill, D. (1976). A Resource Allocation Model for the Evaluation

of Alternatives in Section 208 Planning Considering Environ-
mental, Social and Economic Effects, Proceedings of the
Conference on Environmental Modeling and Simulation,
April 19-22, 1976, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA 60019-76-016, U S .
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 401-406.

Hydrologic Engineering Center (1978). Guide Manual for the

Creation of Grid Cell Data Banks, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Davis, California.

Inhaber, H. Environmental Indices, John Wiley and Sons,

Inc., New York.

Keeney, R.L. (1976). Preference Models for Environmental

Impact, IIASA-RM-76-4, International Institute for Applied
Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

Keown, M.P. and Weathersby, M.R. (1976). Baseline Elements

and Information Sources for Environmental Quality Manage-
ment of Military Installations, Technical Report No. M-76-10,
U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.

32
Kessler, F.M., et al. (1978). Construction Site Noise Control
Cost-Benefit Estimating Procedures, CERL-IR-N-36, U.S.
Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Cham-
paign, Illinois.

King, T.F. (1978). The Archeological Survey: Methods and

Uses, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, U S .
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.

Lavine, M.J., Butler, T.J. and Meyburg, A.H. (1979). Energy

Analysis Manual for Environmental Benefit/Cost Analysis of
Transportation Actions, two volumes, Center for Environ-
mental Research, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

Leopold, L.B., et al. (1971). A Procedure for Evaluating Environ-

mental Impact, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.

Magrab, E.G. (1975). Environmental Noise Control, John Wiley

and Sons, New York.

Meyers, B.E., Fake, E.C., and Ausura, R.V. (1977). Federal

Environmental Data: A Directory of Selected Sources,
National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.

Mueller, P. (1977). Burdening capacity of Ecosystems, Inter-

national Fair and Congress on Techniques in Environmental
Protection, Dusseldorf, F.R. Germany, Universitaet des
Saarlandes, Saarbruecken, West Germany.

Muller, T. (1975). Fiscal Impacts of Land Development, URI

98000, The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C.

33
Muller, T . (1976). Economic Impacts of Land Development:
Employment, Housing, and Property Values, URI 15800, The
Urban Institute, Washington, D. C.

Mumphrey, A.J., Jr., Thayer, R.E., and Wagner, F.W. (1977).

OCS Development in Coastal Louisiana: A Socio-Economic
Impact Assessment, Louisiana State Planning Office Report
No. SPO-77-21, Urban Studies Institute, New Orleans Uni-
'

versity, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Najarian, T.O. and Harleman, D.R.F. (1977) A Real Time

Model of Nitrogen-Cycle Dynamics in an Estuarine System,
Progress in Water Technology, 8, 323-345.

Naval Environmental Support Office, (1976). Data Sources for

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Environ-
mental Impact Statements (EISs), NESO 20.2-015, Naval
Construction Battalion Center, Port Hueneme, California.

Nemerow, N.L. (1974). Scientific Stream Pollution Analysis,

McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

O'Neill, R.V., Ferguson,N., and Watts, J.A. (1977). Bib-

liography of Mathematical Modeling in Ecology, EDFB/
IBP/75/5, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge,
Tennessee.

Orlob, G.T. (1977). Mathematical Modeling of Surface Water

Impoundments, Volume I and 11, Resource Management
Associates, Lafayette, California.

Ostrofsky, M.L. and Duthie, H.C. (1978). An Approach to

Modeling Productivity in Reservoirs, Proceedings: Congress
 in Denmark, 1977, Part 3: Internationale Vereingung f u r
Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie, Volume 20,
1562-1567.

Ott, W.R. (1978). Environmental Indices-Theory and Practice,

Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Overton, D.( 1977). Stormwater Modeling, Proceedings of Inter-

national Symposium on Urban Hydrology, Hydraulics, and
Sediment Control, July 18-21, 1977, Lexington, Kentucky,
Service Bulletin No. 114, Office of Research and Engineering,
University of Kentucky, Lexington Kentucky, 267-274.

Ozturk, Y.F. (1979). Mathematical Modeling of Dissolved Oxy-

gen in Mixed Estuaries, Journal of the Environmental
Engineering Division, American Society of Civil Engineers,
105, 883-904.

Perez, K.T. (1978). Persistence Limits in Ecological Systems,

First American-Soviet Symposium on the Biological Effects
of Pollution o n Marine Organisms, EPA-60019-78-007, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf Breeze, Florida,
112-117.

Phillips, K.J. and DeFilippi, J.A. (1976). Matrix Approach

for Determining Waste Water Management Impacts, Journal
Water Pollution Control Federation, 48, 1759-1765.

Prickett, T.A. (1979). State of the Art of Ground Water Model-

ing, Water Supply Management, 3, 134-141.

Rau, J.G. and Wooten, D.C. (1980). Environmental Impact

Analysis Handbook, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

35
Rubinstein, S. and Horn, R.L. (1978). Risk Analysis in Environ-
mental Studies. I. Risk Analysis Methodology: A Statistical
Approach; 11. Data Management for Environmental Studies,
CONF-780316-8, Atomics International Division, Rockwell
Hanford Operations, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland,
Washington.

Schrender, G.F., Rustagi, K.P., and Bare, B.B. (1976). A

Computerized System for Wild Land Use Planning and
Environmental Impact Assessment, Computers and Op-
erations Research, 3,217-228.

Schwind, P.J. (1977). Environmental Impacts of Land Use

Change, Journal of Environmental Systems, 6, 125-145.

Sellers, J. and North, R.M. (1979). A Viable Methodology to

Implement the Principles and Standards, Water Resources
Bulletin, 15, 167-181.

Shapiro, M., Leucks, D.F., and Kuhner, J. (1978). Assessment

of the Environmental Infrastructure Required by Large Public
and Private Investments, Journal of Environmental Manage-
ment, 7, 157-176.

Sharma, R.K. (1975). Determining Biological Significance of

Environmental Impacts: Science or Trans-Science? (paper
presented a t the Workshop on the Biological Significance of
Environmental Impacts held a t Ann Arbor, Michigan, June),
Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois.

Sondheim, M.W. (1978). A Comprehensive Methodology for

Assessing Environmental Impact, Journal of Environmental
Management, 6, 27-42.

36
Sorenson, J.C. (1971). A Framework for Identification and
Control of Resource Degradation and Conflict in the
Multiple Use of the Coastal Zone, University of California,
Berkeley, California.

Stalnaker, C.B. and Arnette, J.L. (1976). Methodologies for

the Determination of Stream Resource Flow Requirements:
An Assessment, FWS/OBS-76/03, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, D. C.

States, J.B. et al. (1978). A Systems Approach to Ecological

Baseline Studies, FWSIORS-78I21, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Stout, G.E., et al. (1978). Baseline Data Requirements for

Assessing Environmental Impact, IIEQ-78-05, Institute for
Environmental Studies, University of Illinois, Urbana-Cham-
paign, Illinois.

Tamblyn, T.A. and Cederborg, E.A. (1975). Environmental

Assessment Matrix as a Site-Selection Tool-A Case
Study, Nuclear Technology, 25, 598-606.

Turner, D.B. (1970). Workbook of' Atmospheric Dispersion

Estimates, Pub. No. AP-26, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1980). A Habitat Evaluation

System for Water Resources Planning, Lower Mississippi
Valley Division, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

U.S. Bureau of Land Management (19784. BLM Manual

Section 8431-Visual Resource Contrast Rating, Washington,
D.C.
37
U.S. Bureau of Land Management (1978b). BLM Manual
Section 8411-Upland Visual Resource Inventory and Eval-
uation, Washington, D. C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1976). Areawide

Assessment Procedures Manual, 3 volumes, EPA/600/9-
76/14-1,2,3, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1977). User’s Manual

for Single-Source (CRSTER) Model, EPA/450/2-77/013,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1980). Ecological Services

Manual-Habitat as a Basis for Environmental Assessment,
Washington, D .C.

U.S. Forest Service (1974). National Forest Landscape Manage-

ment, Vol. 2, Ch. 1, The Visual Management System,
Washington, D.C.

U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1977). Environmental Assess-

ment Guidelines, Federal Register, Vol. 42, No. 152,
Monday, August 8, 40127-40128.

U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1978). Procedure to Establish

Priorities in Landscape Architecture, Tech. Release No.
65, Washington, D.C.

Van Weringh, J., et al. (1975). Computer-Aided Environmental

Legislative Data System (CELDS) User Manual, CERL-TR-
E-78, U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Lab-
oratory, Champaign, Illinois.
38
Veith, G.D., DeFoe, D.L., and Bergstedt, B.V. (1979).
Measuring and Estimating the Bio-Concentration Factor of
Chemicals in Fish, Journal of the Fisheries Research
Board of Canada, 36, 1040-1048.

Velz, C.J. (1970). Applied Stream Sanitation, Wiley-Inter-

science, New York.

Voorhees, A.M. and Associates (1975). Interim Guide for

Environmental Assessment: HUD Field Office Ediction,
Washington, D. C.

Walker, R. and Bayley, S. (1977-78). Quantitative Assessment of

Natural Values in Benefit-Cost Analysis, Journal of Environ-
mental Systems, 7, 131-147.

Walker, W.R. (1976). Assessment of Irrigation Return Flow

Models, EPA Report No. 600/2/76-219, Department of
Agricultural and Chemical Engineering, Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Ward, D.V. (1978) Biological Environmental Impact Studies:

Theory and Methods, Academic Press, New York.

Whitlatch, E.E., Jr. (1976). Systematic Approaches to Environ-

mental Impact Assessment: An Evaluation, Water Resources
Bulletin, 12, 123-137.

Willeke, G.E. (1978). Assessing the Social Effects of Water

Quality Management Programs, ERC Report No. 03-78,
Environmental Resources Center, Georgia Institute of Tech-
nology, Atlanta, Georgia.

39
Yorke, T.H. (1978). Impact Assessment of Water Resource
Development Activities: A Dual Matrix Approach, FWS/OBS-
78/82, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kearneysville,
West Virginia.

40