BNSF project highlights need for more environmental review

The scale of the controversial BNSF proposal northwest of Phoenix is enormous and points to a huge deficiency in Arizona land-use decision making tools and public disclosure about projects and their impacts.

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality requires permits for developments to assure state and federal standards for air and water quality as well as other environmental concerns are addressed and operated in compliance with applicable laws. ADEQ is to be commended for their work to protect the state.

What is not required by the state is comprehensive review of other impacts associated with large projects. This creates an “information gap” that permits rumor and misinformation to run rampant. This is not good for project sponsors or the public. I suggest a state requirement for environmental impact reviews that is more comprehensive and public information oriented.

Such a law would require objective and expert analysis and reporting of impacts including:  earth, air, water, plant and animals, land use, energy, environmental health, noise, housing light and glare, historic and cultural, transportation, public services, and utilities. Perhaps other elements should be included as well.  The list given should be viewed as a starting idea. Analysis of impacts and mitigation measures would be disclosed and implemented assuring minimal marginal environmental impacts.

A requirement for this type of comprehensive and objective analysis made public would create more transparent decision making as well as providing reliable and accurate public information in a standard format that is centrally available. This would tend to reduce rumors and misleading or disinformation about projects. Such a requirement will be very unpopular with developers, however, the quality of life in this unique and beautiful state must be balanced with economic development not only for the present, but for future generations as well.

Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.