Linear Enterprises; Locational Alternatives; Environmental Impact Assessment.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is an environmental policy and management instrument designed to balance the need to use natural resources and maintain environmental quality at acceptable standards. When conducting an environmental assessment for a project site, it is necessary to explore location alternatives, which must be presented in the Environmental Impact Study, as required by Article 5 of CONAMA resolution 01/86. In theory, locational alternatives must respect environmental restrictions and adapt to the support capacity of the intended environment. However, several authors indicate flaws in the way locational alternatives are presented, such as the absence or poor comparison of alternatives, low quality in studies, impractical alternatives, among others. This work sought to propose a model to guide the selection and presentation of alternative locations for linear projects (Transmission Lines, Highways, Railways and Pipelines), which are major causes of environmental and social impacts. The proposal includes comparative criteria and recommendations for good practices. The research took place based on the following steps: i) elaboration of criteria (based on literature) for evaluating the presentation of alternatives in EIAs; ii) selection of environmental studies available at SEIA; iii) comparison between best practice criteria and the presentation of alternatives from selected studies; iv) proposal of a Good Practices Manual with guidelines for the selection and presentation of locational alternatives to be discussed in the EIA, taking into account environmental, social and economic aspects. From the application of the 26 criteria elaborated in the 17 EIA's found in SEIA (INEMA), it was possible to attest the weaknesses previously pointed out in the literature, such as the lack of participation of all interested parties in the selection process, lack of discussion of the alternative of not installing of the project, unsatisfactory number of alternatives and superficial discussion of the alternatives presented. In this way, it can be stated that the choice of the alternative has been made even before the environmental impact assessment process, with no prior planning or research on the weaknesses and capabilities of the intended location, thus leaving it up to the EIA to carry out the diagnosis of the location, something that is not its function. In this context, an alternative to remedy or mitigate these weaknesses, in addition to a more rigorous assessment by the licensing body, is to provide a guiding document containing instructions for the selection and presentation of better-quality locational alternatives in EIAs. As a response to this need, this work has developed a manual that offers numerous suggestions covering environmental, social and economic aspects, comparative criteria and recommendations for the selection of locational alternatives for linear developments, as well as their presentation in the EIA. We expect that, based on the application of this manual, new projects will be designed with comprehensive planning that addresses not only technological and economic issues but also environmental and social issues.