United States      EPA/220/B-92/013
         Environmental Protection   March 1992
         Agency
&EPA    EPA Reviewer's
         Checklist
         NEPA Documents
         40 CFR Part 6

-------
Project Name
                                 Project f
Name of Reviewer
                                 Review Date
                   EPA REVIEWER'S CHECKLIST
Notes:
                   NEPA DOCUMENTS
                  (40 CFR Part 6)

    1)  Do  not  review an EIS under  this  procedure.
    2)  Fill  out the CE section or  the FNSI  section,
    3)  Fill  out the Final Section.
CE (Categorial  Exclusion)
                                                     N
1.   Does State  use  the CE Checklist?   If  yes,
     go to  12.   If  no,  go to 14.

2.   Is CE  Checklist properly checked off
     to indicate eligibility for a CE?

     Comment
     Is CE checkoff  consonant with P.P. and
     Environmental documents in file, and
     does the checkoff  indicate understanding
     of CE rules?

     Comment
Go to  #5.

Does project  satisfy requirements  for  a       _
CE?  See 40 CFR 6.505(a)  and (b) ,  as
applied to P.P.  and environmental
documents in  file.       Ilf>  ...      .
                         U.S. Environments iVrfection Agency
                         Region 5, Library U"L.-12J)
                         77 West Jackson Coulevard 12th
                                  est Jackson Coulevar
                              Chicago, IL 606C-4-3590

-------
                            -2-
     Comment
     Is CE Notice clearly written,  with  details
     of project and reason for  granting  CE
     adequately described?

     Comment
FNSI (Finding of No Significant Impact

1.   If any of the conditions listed in
     40 CFR 6.508 exist, a FNSI is not
     appropriate and an EIS should have
     been undertaken.

2.   Is NEPA Checklist fully completed,
     citing references to file documents?

     Comment
3.   Does spot check of NEPA Checklist citations
     indicate understanding of questions,
     relevance, and accuracy in filling checklist
     out?

-------
                            -3-


     C eminent
4.   Is the Environmental Assessment filled out
     completely with respect to the provisions
     of 40 CFR 6.506(a) and (b)?

     Comment
5.   Is the Environmental Assessment consonant
     with the P.P., EID,  and other file
     sources?

     Comment
6.   With respect to Public Participation, were
     the requirements of 40 CFR Part 25,
     6.513, and the State satisfactorily
     fulfilled?

     Comment

-------
                            -4-
7.   Does the public  hearing  record,  or other
     documents,  indicate unresolved problems?

     Comment
     If relevant,  were  the  requirements of
     40 CFR Part 6,  Appendix A (Executive
     Orders 11988  and 11990 on floodplains
     and wetlands) met?

     Comment
     If relevant,  was necessary permit
     acquired or permit conditions met,
     under the Coastal Zone Management
     Act?
     Comment
10.  If relevant, were necessary coordination
     procedures carried out under Endangered
     Species Act and analagous State statutes?

     Comme n t                          	

-------
                            -5-
11.  Same as 110, for Pish and Wildlife
     Coordination Act?

     Comment
12.  Same as flO for National Historic
     Preservation Act.  Did SHPO give
     clearance?  Was a survey necessary?

     Did the Advisory Council concur with
     a finding of no adverse impact? If
     an MOA was necessary, was it executed?
     Were appropriate grant conditions placed?

     Comment
13.  Same as flO for sites registered, or
     for registration, under the Historic
     Sites,  Buildings, and Antiquities
     Act of  1935.

     Comment
14.   Same as flO for rivers registered under
     the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

-------
                            -6-
     Comment
15.  Same as 110 for agriculturally
     significant lands.   See  EPA Policy
     to Protect Environmentally
     Significant Agricultural Lands.

     Comment
16.   Other problem/issues,  as #10.

     Comment
17.   Was treatment capacity  selected in
     conformance with existing 208, air,
     local, and regional  plans?

     Comment

-------
                            -7-
Final Section

1.   Is documentation appropriate, complete
     and properly filed?
     Comment
2.   Are State-written documents clear,
     properly formatted, relevant?

     Comment
3.   In your opinion,  did the environmental
     review take all reasonable steps?

     Comme n t
4.    General Comment

-------
951
D-08-02-83/08-03-83/08-08-83
F-08-03-83/08-08-83
Hamilton/Brody
D-81-I-04-951ABC
                                     •ffV.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFT1CE: 1*92 - «4H-003/407I»

-------