Summary: Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO examined whether: (1) federal agency activities affecting coastal areas were undergoing required environmental reviews; and (2) such reviews ensured that all major environmental impacts were considered in the decisionmaking process.
GAO found that: (1) such federal activities as highway construction, harbor or river dredging, and federal land transfers had significant impacts on coastal zones; (2) coastal zone management officials noted that the environmental review processes provided adequate information to assess the environmental impacts of proposed federal activities; (3) state and federal coastal zone officials disagreed on whether certain federal agency activities were subject to environmental review requirements and on the adequacy of environmental reviews involving indirect impacts; (4) comprehensive plans that addressed regional environmental goals and the infrastructure needed to support growth could help officials in assessing the cumulative impacts of federal activities in coastal regions; (5) significant growth-related problems occurred in coastal areas where there was no comprehensive planning, or where such planning took place only after significant development occurred; (6) states with comprehensive plans for coastal areas were better equipped to assess the long-term, cumulative impacts of proposed activities; and (7) although coastal zone management statutes encouraged states to develop comprehensive plans, there was little guidance available to states on developing or using comprehensive plans to assess cumulative impacts.
