Challenges to Analysis of Air and Rail Alternatives in Government Environmental Impact Review Processes
Abstract
The current institutional process for project-level environmental review, the government-required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), requires assessment of the proposed project, the no-build alternative, and alternatives to the proposed project. Despite growing academic research to compare the environmental impacts of air and high-speed rail (HSR) infrastructure, there are few instances of multimodal alternatives analysis in airport and HSR EIS documents. In this paper, examples of EISs for air and HSR capacity-enhancement projects are chronicled to identify key challenges to completing modal alternative analysis in the EIS: the spatial heterogeneity of the physical infrastructure for air and HSR, the framing of EIS purpose and need statements, and the complicated interpretations of environmental impact significance thresholds. The paper concludes by proposing strategies to incentivize modal alternative assessments and highlight methods that are needed to perform high-quality comparative analysis to inform decision makers, whether in the context of the EIS or in upstream planning processes.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
1. Chester M., and Horvath A. High-Speed Rail with Emerging Automobiles and Aircraft Can Reduce Environmental Impacts in California's Future. Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 7, No. 3, 2012.
2. MITRE Corporation. Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System 2007–2025. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2007.
3. Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Chronology of High Speed Rail Corridors. http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/passenger/618.shtml. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
4. National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems Narrative 2011–2015. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2010.
5. Federal Railroad Administration High-Speed Rail Strategic Plan. Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2009.
6. Federal Aviation Administration Order 5100.38C, Airport Improvement Program Handbook. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005.
7. Coogan M. A., Hansen M., Ryerson M. S., Kiernan L., Last J., Marchi R., and Yatzeck R. ACRP Report 310: Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
8. Brownstone D., Hansen M., and Madanat S. Review of Bay Area/California High Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study. Report UCB-ITS-RR-2010-1. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 2010.
9. Charles River Associates. Independent Ridership and Passenger Revenue Projections for High Speed Rail Alternatives in California. Boston, Mass., 2000.
10. Bass R. E., Herson A. I., and Bogdan K. M. The NEPA Book: A Step-by-Step Guide on How to Comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. Solano Press Books, Point Arena, Calif., 2001.
11. 40 C.F.R. 1500–1508. CEQ Regulations for Implementing NEPA. 1978. http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ceq/toc_ceq.htm. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
12. Robb J. T. Assessing Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Sites to Aid in Establishing Mitigation Ratios. Wetlands, Vol. 22, 2002, pp. 435–440.
13. BenDor T., and Brozovic N. Determinants of Spatial and Temporal Patterns in Compensatory Wetland Mitigation. Environmental Management, Vol. 4, 2007, pp. 349–364.
14. Citizens for Smart Growth, a Florida Non Profit Corporation;, et al. Plaintiffs v. Mary E. Peters, Secretary, Department of Transportation, et al. Defendants. United States District Court, S.D. Florida, Ft. Pierce Division, 2010.
15. 64 F.R. 28545. Federal Railroad Administration Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts, 1999. http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/agency/detail.cfm?MemberID=3. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
16. 71 F.R. 25279, FAA Order 1050.1E Policies and Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts & FAA Order 5050.4B National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions, 2006. http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/agency/detail.cfm?MemberID=8. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
17. Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. http://ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/guidelines/art19.html. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
18. Eagan M. E. Comparison of Noise Impacts of Intercity Rail and Short-Haul Air Travel. Presented at 90th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2011.
19. Janic M. High-Speed Rail and Air Passenger Transport: A Comparison of the Operational Environmental Performance. Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 217, No. 4, 2003, pp. 259–269.
20. EU Position Paper on Dose Response Relationships Between Transportation Noise and Annoyance. European Commission, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, 2002.
21. Miedema H. M. Exposure–Response Relationships for Environmental Noise. Inter-Noise Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 2007.
22. Campos J., and de Rus G. S. Some Stylized Facts About High Speed Rail: A Review of HSR Experiences Around the World. Transport Policy, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2009, pp. 19–28.
23. Stallen P. J. M. A Theoretical Framework for Environmental Noise Annoyance. Noise Health (serial online), Vol. 1, No. 3, 1999, pp. 69–79. http://www.noiseandhealth.org/text.asp?1999/1/3/69/31712. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
24. Hansen M., Ryerson M. S., and Marchi R. New Methodologies for Airport Environmental Impact Analysis. In Modeling and Managing Airport Performance: Theory and Practice (Zografos K., Odoni A., and Andreatta G., eds.), Wiley, New York, forthcoming.
25. High Speed Ground Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005.
26. Massachusetts, et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al. Supreme Court of the United States. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 2007.
27. Freeman J., and Vermeule A. Massachusetts v. EPA: From Politics to Expertise. Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Mass., 2007.
28. Meltz R. Federal Agency Actions Following the Supreme Court's Climate Change Decision in Massachusetts v. EPA: A Chronology. Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C., 2012.
29. CEQ. Draft NEPA Guidance on Consideration of the Effects of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, D.C., 2010.
30. Considering Greenhouse Gases and Climate Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): Interim Guidance. FAA, 2012.
31. Schrooten L.et al. Forecasted Maritime Shipping Emissions for Belgium with an Activity Based Emission Model. Proc., TAC-Conference, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2006.
32. Yang D., Kwan S. H., Lu T.et al. An Emission Inventory of Marine Vessels in Shanghai in 2003. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 41, No. 15, 2007, pp. 5183–5190.
33. Kim B., Waitz I. A., Vigilante M., and Bassarab R. Guidebook on Preparing Airport GHG Emissions Inventories. ACRP, 2009. onlinepubs. trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_rpt_011.pdf. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
34. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation. O'Hare Modernization FEIS. 2005. http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_development/omp/eis/feis/. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
35. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation. FEIS for New Runways, Terminal Facilities and Related Facilities at Washington Dulles International Airport. 2005. http://www.metwashairports.com/dulles/1013.htm. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
36. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation. FEIS for the Development and Expansion of Runway 9R/27L and Other Associated Airport Projects at Fort Lauderdale–Hollywood International Airport, Vol. 1. 2008. http://www.broward.org/Airport/Community/Pages/FEIS.aspx#feis. Accessed Aug. 1 2012.
37. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Capacity Enhancement Program at Philadelphia International Airport FEIS. 2010. http://www.phl-cep-eis.com/documents.asp. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
38. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Chicago to St. Louis High Speed Rail Tier 1 DEIS. 2012. http://www.idothsr.org/tier_1/deis.aspx. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
39. Florida High Speed Rail Tampa to Orlando FEIS. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005.
40. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Statewide Program Environmental Report EIR/EIS, Vol. 1. 2005. http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/final_pgrm_eireisreport_vol1.aspx. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
41. FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation. FAA Airport Environmental Records of Decision. http://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/records_decision/. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
42. 49 U.S.C. §47107(a)(1). http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2011-title49/USCODE-2011-title49-subtitleVII-partB-chap471-subchapI-sec47107/content-detail.html. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
43. Anderson Z. Scott Says No to High Speed Rail Plan. Herald Tribune, Feb. 17, 2011. http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20110217/ARTICLE/102171064. Accessed Aug. 1, 2012.
44. ASCE. Policy Statement 402—High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail. http://www.asce.org/Public-Policies-and-Priorities/Public-Policy-Statements/Policy-Statement-402–High-Speed-and-Intercity-Passenger-Rail/. Accessed Nov. 1, 2012.
45. Cambridge Systematics. High Speed Rail: A National Perspective, High Speed Rail Experience in the United States. Amtrak, Washington, D.C., 2008.
46. Compliance with NEPA in Implementing High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program. FRA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2009.
47. The Amtrak Vision for the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak, Washington, D.C., 2009.
48. Karkkainen B. C. Toward a Smarter NEPA: Monitoring and Managing Government's Environmental Performance. Columbia Law Review, Vol. 102, No. 4, 2002, pp. 903–972.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: January 1, 2013
Issue published: January 2013
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 51
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 4
- Impacts of high-speed rail projects on CO2 emissions due to modal inte...
- Investigation of environmental justice analysis in airport planning pr...
- Planners Take Flight...
- Grand challenges for high-speed rail environmental assessment in the U...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
