United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Administration
and Resources Management
Washington, DC 20480
EPA 4841 -
ApriM994
Office of Administration
EPA National Environmental
Policy Act
Review Procedures
For EPA Facilities
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NOTICE
This document presents a brief summary of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) regulations. It is not meant to be a complete or detailed description of all
applicable NEPA regulations. For more information concerning specific requirements
consult the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40 Parts 6 and Parts 1500 through
1508.
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this manual is to present procedural guidance for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Site Managers and Headquarters Project Managers on the
NEPA. The manual presents strategies and procedures for integrating environmental impact
assessments into the construction management process. The strategies and procedures stated
in this manual should be used for all projects employing building and facility (B&F) funds
and may be applied to projects employing alternative funding.
This manual was developed by the Engineering Planning and Architecture Branch
(EPAB) of the Facilities Management and Services Division (FMSD) to provide an easy-to-
use, comprehensive guide that effectively presents the requirements of the Council on
Environmental Quality's (CEQ's) regulations, 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, and EPA specific
regulations 40 CFR Part 6, for implementing the procedural provisions of the NEPA. It also
supplements EPA's "Policy and Procedures for the Review of Federal Actions Impacting the
Environment" manual and applicable sections of the EPA "FMSD, Facilities Management"
Manual 4840.
To accomplish these objectives, the manual comprises five chapters, the contents of which
are outlined in Figure Executive Summary-1.
In addition, the manual presents applicable references, sources of supplementary
information, and examples of NEPA documents to assist the EPA project manager in
integrating NEPA into facility management projects.
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
OVERVIEW OF THE NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES MANUAL
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Chapter 1 Introduction b
Basis lor compliance 1
Roles and responsibilities
NEPA Terms |
4
Chapter 2 Planning
Compliance strategies
Integration methods * H
Project requirements
\
Chapter 4 Docu
Categorical Excl
Environmental Ir
Chapter 3 Procedure* ||
Oeasionmaking process
Decisionmaking criteria 1
Project procedures I
mentation
usions
ssessments
npact Statements
\
'ChaptersPublic
Environmental t
Environmental 1
assessments
npact Statements
1
Figure Executive Summary -1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CONTENTS OF CHAPTERS
CHAPTER CHAPTER
TITLES NUMBERS
INTRODUCTION i
NEPA COMPLIANCE PLANNING 2
NEPA PROCEDURES : 3
NEPA DOCUMENTATION 4
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND THE SCOPING PROCESS 5
APPENDIX A - REFERENCE MATERIALS AND NEPA FACILITY MANAGEMENT
COMPLIANCE COORDINATORS
APPENDIX B - NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
APPENDIX C - COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, REGULATIONS FOR
IMPLEMENTING THE PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS OF NEPA
APPENDIX D - ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, PROCEDURES FOR
IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNCIL OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ON NEPA
APPENDIX E - EXAMPLE OF A RECORD OF DECISION
APPENDIX F - GLOSSARY OF TERMS
APPENDDC G - EXAMPLE OF A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
LIST OF ACRONYMS
Acronym
AA
CEQ
CFR
CX
DEIS
EA
EIS
EPA
EPAB
FEIS
FMSD
FOIA
FNSI
FR
NEPA
NOI
OARM
OE
OFA
ORD
PDEIS
POC
FOR
ROD
RA
RTP
SEIS
Definitions
Assistant Administrator
Council on Environmental Quality
Code of Federal Regulations
Categorical Exclusion
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Environmental Assessment
Environmental Information Document
Environmental Impact Statement
Environmental Protection Agency
Engineering, Planning, and Architecture Branch
Final Environmental Impact Statement
Facilities Management and Services Division
Freedom of Information Act
Finding of No Significant Impact
Federal Register
National Environmental Policy Act
Notice of Intent
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Office of Enforcement
Office of Federal Activities
Office of Research and Development
Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Point of Contact
Program of Requirements
Record of Decision
Regional Administrator
Research Triangle Park
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
u
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
Table of Contents
PARAGRAPH PARAGRAPH
TITLES NUMBERS
Overview 1-1
Scope and Purpose 1-2
EPA Staff Roles and Responsibilities 1-2
Authority 1-3
EPA Procedures Relating to NEPA Documentation 1-3
Definitions 1-3
FIGURE FIGURE
TITLES NUMBERS
Definitions 1-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
1. OVERVIEW.
NEPA ensures that environmental impacts and associated public concerns are
considered in decisions on Federal projects. The EPA's FMSD, Engineering, Planning, and
Architecture Branch (EPAB) developed this manual to assist EPA project managers and
decision makers in complying with NEPA regulations for construction projects.
EPA's NEPA responsibilities will be effectively discharged by building and facility
(B&F) project managers by following these procedures:
a. Determine the appropriate level of NEPA review for a construction project;
b. Define the significant issues to be analyzed through information-gathering and
public participation process;
c. Evaluate project alternatives, including the proposed action and possible
mitigation measures, to determine whether their environmental impacts are significant, not
significant, or none at all; and
d. Develop documentation to assist the public and decision makers in evaluating
the proposed action and alternatives.
NEPA's environmental review process is not limited to strictly ecological effects such
as air quality, water quality, and waste disposal. Effects also include aesthetics, historic,
cultural, socioeconomic, or health impacts. Therefore, parameters such as population
displacement, socioeconomic impacts, land use (from a planning and zoning perspective), and
transportation are considered.
Many single actions, when viewed in isolation, may not be considered as major
actions with significant environmental effects; however, a series of small related actions may
cumulatively and over time have significant effects on review parameters. In all cases, the
incremental impact of an action when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable
future actions should be taken into account when determining environmental effects.
2. SCOPE AND PURPOSE.
This manual provides EPA Headquarters, Regional and field personnel, as well as
major laboratories with guidance to facilitate effective NEPA compliance planning. It also
1-1
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
provides users with an overview of the NEPA review process in order to simplify applicable
documentation and decisionmaking requirements. Furthermore, this guidance establishes
policy, responsibilities, and procedures for integrating environmental considerations into EPA
construction planning and decisionmaking. It establishes criteria for determining what
construction projects are excluded from the requirements to prepare an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS).
This manual's objective is to clarify the NEPA process in terms of planning (Chapter
2), procedures (Chapter 3), content and format (Chapter 4), and public participation (Chapter
5).
3. EPA STAFF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
EPAB is responsible for assuring that all construction projects comply with NEPA
regulations. A responsible official is designated for each construction project. In cases where
EPAB receives and manages design and construction funding, the Chief of EPAB .is the
responsible official for NEPA matters. If design and construction funding is received and
managed by one of EPA's Regional Offices, the Regional Administrator (RA) is the
designated responsible official or by one of EPA's Program Offices, the Assistant
Administrator (AA) or an individual is designated the responsible official. If the Office of
Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Research Triangle Park (RTP), or
Cincinnati is responsible for design and construction funding, the Directors of
OARM/RTP/Cincinnati are considered the responsible officials. If the EPA is working with
the General Services Administration (GSA) to construct new space, the GSA is the lead
agency and will prepare the environmental documentation with the cooperation of EPA on
design and use specifications. The responsible official is charged with ensuring that the
procedures outlined in this manual are completed for all major action construction projects.
Additionally, the AA for Enforcement, through the Office of Federal Activities (OFA), assists
with NEPA compliance by:
a. Acting as an EPA liaison with CEQ and other Federal and State entities on
NEPA matters;
b. Advising the Administrator and Deputy Administrator on projects which
involve more than one EPA office, are highly controversial, are nationally significant, or
pioneer EPA policy;
c. Supporting the Administrator in providing EPA policy guidance on NEPA;
d. Coordinating training of EPA NEPA personnel;
e. Carrying out administrative duties related to maintaining status of EISs within
EPA;
1-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
f. Establishing a government-wide filing and record keeping system for
categorical exclusions (CXs), EAs, and EISs;
g. Publishing a weekly notice in the Federal Register (FR) listing all EISs
received during a given week;
h. When required, assuring that a Notice of Intent (NOI) is published in the FR;
i. Providing CEQ with one copy of all EISs filed; and
j. Reducing prescribed review periods for draft and final EISs after consultation
with the responsible official (see 40 CFR §6.401, 1506.9, 1506.10).
Project managers also can obtain technical assistance with the NEPA process and the
preparation of environmental documents. Within most Regions, there is a NEPA Compliance
or 309 Review Program with experienced staff that can perform these services in-house or
have contractor support available to assist media programs with NEPA compliance. Appendix
A provides the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of Headquarters and Regional NEPA
Coordinators.
4. AUTHORITY.
EPA's regulations for NEPA implementation are codified in 40 CFR Part 6. Those
specific to facility projects are located in Subpart I. These regulations are included as
Appendix D. NEPA is provided in Appendix B and CEQ's NEPA implementation
regulations are provided in Appendix C.
5. EPA PROCEDURES RELATING TO NEPA RECORDS MANAGEMENT.
Complete NEPA-related documents must be maintained on-site at the facility and by
either the EPAB Chief for Headquarters actions or by the RA for regional actions or the AA
for program actions.
6. DEFINITIONS.
Basic NEPA terms used throughout this manual are defined below in Figure 1-1 and
additional terms are .explained in Appendix F, Glossary of Terms.
1-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
DEFINITIONS
-:.'.
.-&.'
*' ?*
&--.
.
/*'
Categories'of actions which do not individually, cumulatively over time, or in conjunction
with other Federal, State, local or private actions have a significant effect on the quality of
the human environment and which, have been identified as having no such effect based on
the requirements in 40 CFR §6505, may be exempted from the substantive environmental
review requirements for this part. Environmental information documents, environmental
assessments (EAs) or environmental impact statements (EISs) will not be required for
excluded actions. A CX is prepared in order to reduce paperwork, and to delay, if not
eliminate, unnecessary EA ana E1S preparation.
A concise document prepared to provide sufficient data, evidence, and analysis to
determine whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) or finding of no significant
impact (FNSI) is required for an action. Preparing a formal EA is not necessary in cases
when the EPA determines that a CX is appropriate or when an EIS will be automatically
prepared.
'Environmental
lmp9Ct$(afe
(EIS);;: .-
-
A detailed, succinct document required of all Federal actions likely to have significant
effects on the environment. The document may be directly prepared if the project is
presumed to have a significant impact or if an environmental assessment (EA) determines
that an EIS should be prepared. An EIS provides the public and decision makers with clear,
written documentation or possible environmental effects.
A document providing succinct evidence of why a proposed action will not have a
significant impact on the environment. An accepted FNSI nullifies the requirement for
I submission of an environmental impact statement (EIS).
itit Impact
.Intent.
A brief notice placed in the Federal Register by EPA considering a major action informs
a point of contact (POO within EPA to answer questions about the proposed action and the
EIS.
Record of Decision
"
*=#
V*'
A concise, public environmental document, required under the provisions of 40 CFR
§1505.2, stating the final decision on action for which a final EIS has been prepared on a
proposed major Federal action and the alternatives considered by EPA. Furthermore, a
ROD states whether all precautions to avoid or minimize injury to the environment were
adopted, and if not, a statement explaining why precautions were not taken. RODs must
be made available to the public ana disseminated to parties that commented on the draft
and final EIS.
Figure 1-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 2 - NEPA COMPLIANCE PLANNING
Table of Contents
PARAGRAPH
TITLES
Compliance Strategy . ..
Project Level Compliance
PARAGRAPH
NUMBERS
2-1
2-3
FIGURE
TITLES
FIGURE
NUMBERS
Overview of NEPA Process: Major Tiers of Analysis .. ..: 2-1
NEPA Review/Project Planning Integration Timeline
Categorical Exclusions 2-2
NEPA Review/Project Planning Integration Timeline
Environmental Assessments 2-3
NEPA Review/Project Planning Integration Timeline
Environmental Impact Statements 2-4
Project Level Compliance Worksheet .- 2-5
Cross-Cutters 2-6
2-i
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 2 - NEPA COMPLIANCE PLANNING
The NEPA regulations identify three basic types of environmental impact reviews.
This chapter provides guidelines for identifying the appropriate type of environmental impact
reviews for specific facility projects. It'also defines typical time requirements to complete
these reviews and illustrates how the NEPA reviews should be integrated with construction
project planning, conceptualization, and design activities.
1. COMPLIANCE STRATEGY.
NEPA compliance planning is an integral component of EPA's comprehensive
environmental protection program. By conducting NEPA reviews early in the planning and
decisionmaking processes for new construction projects, EPA can identify viable alternatives
(including a no-action alternative), assess the environmental impacts of these alternatives,
provide a basis for informed selection of a preferred alternative and evaluate measures to
mitigate the adverse environmental effects of the selected alternative. The NEPA process also
assures that public concerns and interests are considered as part of the decisionmaking
process.
a. Process Overview. Absent a statutory exception (where determined by the
Office of General Counsel or an emergency deviation granted by the AA, Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), (see Chapter 3), EPA construction projects
are subject to three tiers of NEPA reviews:
(1) CX determination;
(2) Preparation of an EA; and
(3) Preparation of an EIS.
Figure 2-1 presents an overview of the process used to determine the
appropriate level of NEPA review.
The first tier of NEPA review (Tier 1 Analysis) screens construction projects
against categories of actions that normally do not require either an EA or an EIS. Actions
eligible under these categories have minimal or no effect on environmental quality and pose
no environmentally significant change to existing conditions. If a construction project falls
under one of these criteria, it may be granted a CX that exempts it from further
environmental impact reviews.
For actions not meeting the criteria for a CX, a second level of review (Tier 2
Analysis), called an EA, is required. The purpose of the EA is to determine whether or not a
2-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
proposed action may significantly affect the environment. If the results of the EA indicate no
significant impact, or significant impacts that can be mitigated, EPA will issue a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FNSI), which may address measures to mitigate potential
environmental impacts.
Conversely, if the EA determines that potentially significant environmental
consequences may result from a proposed action, an EIS (Tier 3 Analysis) is required. An
EIS provides a more detailed evaluation of the proposed action, mitigation opportunities and
alternatives that may reduce impacts. In cases where EPA anticipates that an action may
significantly impact the environment, a decision can be made to prepare an EIS without first
developing an EA.
After a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is prepared and at the
time of its decision, EPA must publish a public Record of Decision (ROD), which addresses
how the EIS findings, including consideration alternatives, and mitigation measures were
considered in the EPA's decisionmaking process. An example of a ROD is provided in
Appendix E.
b. NEPA Review Timing and Integration. EPA NEPA regulations require that
NEPA factors be integrated as early in the Agency planning process as possible. To meet this
requirement, NEPA review activities must be closely integrated with EPA's established
construction planning, conceptualization, and design processes. Since the three tiers of NEPA
reviews differ in complexity and duration, it is important to define the NEPA review
requirements during early program planning and scheduling. In many cases, the NEPA
review process may represent a limiting factor for construction projects. The following
sections provide an overview of integration and timing requirements for the three tiers of
NEPA reviews.
(1) Categorical Exclusions. EPA personnel managing or coordinating a
facility project should begin determining eligibility for a CX concurrently with project
conceptualization. Since the design to construction time frame for minor projects (i.e.,
concrete pads, small internal renovations) that typically qualify for a CX is 3-6 months, data
gathering and CX application development generally should be completed within the first
month of project planning. This will allow enough time for the action's responsible official
to approve or revoke the CX application prior to detailed design [i.e., Program of
Requirements (POR) completion]. In addition, early environmental reviews will yield data
useful in performing an EA or EIS if the CX application is denied. Figure 2-2 illustrates the
stages of the NEPA review process associated with CX determinations and identifies the
integration of NEPA and project planning steps for small facility construction or alteration
projects. More detailed procedural guidance for conducting CX determinations is provided in
Chapter 3.
2-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
(2) Environmental Assessments. The EA review should commence during
the earliest stages of conceptual planning. Initially, conceptual documents should, be used to
define the proposed action and alternatives. Once the action and alternatives have been
identified, potential impacts stemming from regulatory, environmental, and socioeconomic
factors can be assessed. This phase of review should be conducted concurrently with the
conceptual design phase of the project (i.e., POR development). The results of the potential
impact assessment will result in the preparation of a draft and final EA, summarizing the
impacts associated with a proposed facility project. The EA also will provide adequate
information to determine whether a FNSI is justified or an EIS must be prepared. Because
the outcome of the EA process may be uncertain, it is important to include schedule
contingencies to allow for preparing an EIS, if needed.
Figure 2-3 illustrates time requirements for EAs and the required
integration with planning and design activities.
(3) Environmental Impact Statements. The EIS process represents the most
extensive level of NEPA analysis. As a result, EPA facility actions requiring the preparation
of EISs are typically limited to larger construction projects that represent the greatest
likelihood for potentially significant impacts. In general, large construction projects require
12-18 months from project inception to actual construction. The time frame required for EIS
development ranges from 8-20 months and, therefore may exceed the planning/preliminary
design period for large projects (6-12 months). Accordingly, NEPA requirements must be
considered in project scheduling to reduce the potential for construction delays and assure the
availability of appropriate environmental documentation for informed decisionmaking.
The key elements of the EIS process are illustrated in Figure 2-4. This
figure should be used to determine the relationships of NEPA and project planning phases
associated with major facility construction activities. Chapter 3 will describe detailed
procedures for completing the EIS process.
2. PROJECT LEVEL COMPLIANCE.
The NEPA review process should not be viewed as an independent activity, but rather
as an integral component of a project's environmental compliance program. At the onset of a
project, the NEPA review facilitates the assessment of project-specific variables, including
regulatory, environmental, and socioeconomic factors. To assist in identifying relevant
project considerations, personnel overseeing NEPA review activities should consult with the
appropriate Regional NEPA Coordinator (see Appendix A). These individuals represent a
valuable information resource and maintain access to recent or current NEPA documentation.
Regulatory factors include those requirements that need to be considered to achieve
compliance with standards, permits, and plans. Environmental factors must be evaluated to
establish baseline conditions, determine site suitability, and identify potential impacts.
2-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Socioeconomic considerations include potential effects on local residential dwellings, public
utilities, traffic, and population trends. Figure 2-5 'provides a project level compliance
worksheet that can be used to prepare an initial assessment of project-specific variables.
Other important factors, such as energy conservation, pollution prevention, or recycling
programs, are also required to be considered in the design and assessment of major actions
(see Glossary, page F-2 for EPA definition of pollution prevention).
Environmental permits may be required for construction projects. EPA is responsible
for preparing permit applications and working with the permitting authorities to identify
permit conditions. Much of the data developed in support of permitting will be useful in the
NEPA reviews and, hence, it is critical that these two activities be closely coordinated. Air
and water pollution discharge permitting authorities, for example, may request monitoring of
ambient or baseline conditions for as long as one year. This background would be extremely
useful in preparing the EA or EIS for the project.
Congress has passed a number of additional environmental laws that address Federal
responsibility for protecting and conserving special resources. These laws are generally
referred to as "cross-cutters" because the requirement to comply with them cuts across all
Federal programs. The cross-cutters require Federal agencies to consider the impact that their
programs and individual actions might have on particular resources and to document such
considerations as part of the agency's decisionmaking process. Generally, the process
involves coordinating with the agencies administering the cross-cutters, and providing an
opportunity for public comment before making a decision on an action. The evaluation that
is conducted under cross-cutters is usually integrated with the environmental reviews carried
out under NEPA to reduce paperwork and the potential for delays. Figure 2-6 gives an
overview of cross-cutters applicable to EPA construction projects.
This chapter outlined EPA's strategy for complying with NEPA regulations by
integrating EPA reviews with construction project planning, conceptualization, design and
compliance activities. In the following chapter, step-wise procedures for completing NEPA
reviews are provided.
2-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
OVERVIEW OF NEPA PROCESS: MAJOR TIERS OF ANALYSIS
Proposed action
Tier! Analysis:
.Categorical
'Exclusions
(CX)
Tier 2 Analysis:
^Environmental
Assessments
(EA)
Tier 3 Analysis:
Environmental
.Impact
Statement
(EIS)
.Record of
Decision (ROD)
the
Responsible
Official tor the
action approved or denied
its disposition as a
categorical
exclusion ?
Is action eligible
for a categorical
exclusion in
accordance with
40 CFR §6.107?
Ensure that the
docu fnont&tion in
40 CFR §6.107 is
prepared
IB the action likely
to have significant
environmental
impacts?
Perform EA for the proposed action
Issue FNSI
for the
action
Bcuon &pprovoo its
disposition based
Prepare and publish NOI
Initiate selected action
Figure 2-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NEPA REVIEW/PROJECT PLANNING INTEGRATION TIMELINE
(CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS^
NEPA Review
Process
Project
and Design
Timeline
EPA initiates ' Responsible Responsible Proceed with
preparation ol Official reviews Official issues selected action if
categorical exclusion ' exclusion exclusion is
exclusion application determination upheld
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase Detailed Design Phase . . ^
, ^^ I f f ^^L
3-6 Months*
,
Key: Project Planning Initiation Stan ol Detailed Design ^ Start ol Construction
Represents average project planning/design timetrame; special circumstances may affect periods cited herein.
Figure 2-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NEPA REVIEW/PROJECT PLANNING INTEGRATION TIMELINE
(ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS)
NEPA Review
Process
%! *
projeci
Planning pj
and Design
Timeline
Key: Project Plar
Evaluate
potential Impacts
Define associated with Determine If Proceed with
proposed the proposed significant selected action if
action and -^ action, alternatives. " impacts are ^ FNSI issued or
alternatives and mitigation, and likely . prepare EIS
prepare draft
and final EA
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase Detailed Design Phase
" ^
4-12 Months* |
ming Initiation Stan of Detailed Design /^ Stan of Construction
Figure 2-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NEPA REVIEW/PROJECT PLANNING INTEGRATION TIMELINE
(ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS)
Process*
attribute
Notloaof
Imam
Conduct
scoping
aciivMs
ktontlyand
upsets sno
alternatives.
Props w sno
lite draft
EIS
Public
review,
incorporating
and filing of
linalEIS
Mandatory
watting
period,
followed by
issuance ot
the ROD
-
PlWWMI
selected
action
Project
Planning
and Design
Timeline
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
Detailed Design Phase
8-20 Months*
Key: Pioiect Planning Initiation Stan ol Detailed Design
Stan ol Construction
Does not Include EA preparation time.
Represents average project plannno/dasign timelrame. special circumstances may atlea periods died herein.
Figure 2-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
PROJECT LEVEL COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Assessment Factors
Regulations
Length of Impact
Effect on Environment
Mitigation
Required
I. Regulatory Factors
A. Air Pollution Control (including CFCs)
Drinking Water Management
C. Water Pollution Control
D. Hazardous Waste Management
E Solid Waste Management
F. PCB Management
Underground Storage Tank Management
H. Radioactive Materials Management
II M|*|
ugrn
II. Environmental Factors
A Natural Factors
^^H
2. Vegetation
3. Endangered Species
4. Water and Hydrology
5. Air and Noise
6. Physiography
7. Soils and Erosion
8. Historical. Archaeological.
Paleontological Resources
9. Prime Farmlands
10. Wetlands
11. Fbodplains
12. Wild and Scenic Rivers
13. Coastal Zone Areas
14. Coastal Barriers Resources
15. National Wilderness
B. Human Factors
1. Demography
2. Housing
3. Utilities
4. Police. Fire, and Schools
5. Social Services
6. Recreation and Aesthetics
7. Land Use
8. Traffic and Transportation
9. Quality of Life
Figure 2-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
PROJECT LEVEL COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Assessment Factors
(continued)
Regulations
£
o.
i
Length of Impact
|f£
»
fe,
- Effect on Environment
*
!i
P
r
Mitigation
Required
III. Socioeconoinic Factors
A Residential Dwellings
BL Local Employment
C. Public Health and Well-Being
0. Relocation ot Public Utilities
E Traffic and Congestion
F. Safety
GL Effect on Population Trends
H. Adverse Community Reaction to the Project
^
'
*
Figure 2-5A
-------
CROSS-CUTTERS
EXECUTIVE ORDER
DESCIUFOON AND INTENT,
AGENCIES
REGULATIONS
Endangered Species Act, 16
U.S.G. i53i,eLsea.
Ensures that Federal Agencies protect and conserve endangered
and threatened species.
Prevents or requires modification of projects that could jeopardize
endangered/threatened species and/or destroy or adversely modify
critical habitat of such species.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries
Service
50 CrK Fart 4UZ
50 CFR Parts 450.451,
452, and 453
The National Historic
Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C.
470. et seq.
Requires Federal Agencies to provide the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation an opportunity for comment on undertaking,
affecting properties listed or eligible for listings on the National
Register for Historic Places.
National Park Service
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation
State Historic Preservation
Offices
36 CFR Parts 60.61,63,
68,79, and 800
48 FR 190. Part IV
53 FR 4727-46
Archeological and Historic
Preservation Act, as
amended, 16 U.S.C. 469-
469c
Provides for recovery or preservation of cultural resources that
may be damaged by Federal construction activities.
Requires notification of the Secretary of Interior when
unanticipated archeological materials are discovered in
construction.
Departmental Consulting
Archeologist, National Park
Service
36 CFR Part 800
The Wild and Scenic Rivers
Ad, 16 U.S.C. 271
Prohibits Federal agencies from assisting the construction of water
resource projects having direct, adverse effects on rivers listed in
the National Wild and Scenic River System or rivers under study
for inclusion in the system.
National Park Service
Bureau of Land Management
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 297.
SubpartA
The Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C.
661 ei sea.
Protects fish and wildlife when Federal actions result in the
control or modification of a natural stream or body of water.
Requires Federal Agencies to take into consideration the effect
that water-related projects would have on fish and wildlife
resources; take action to prevent loss/damage to these resources;
and provide for the development/improvement of these resources.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries
Service
None
Figure 2-6
-------
CROSS-CUTTERS fcnnrim»»Hl
: LEGISLATION/ :.
EXECUTIVE OKJUEit
Coastal Zone Management
Act, 16 U.S.C. Section 1451
el sea.
Act, 16U.S.C.3501 elSBL
The Wilderness Act, 16
U.S.C. 1131 fit s«.
Farmland Protection Policy
Act, 7 U.S.C. 4201 fi| seq.
Executive Order 11990 -
Protection of Wetlands
Executive Order 11988 -
Floodplain Management
. -v . : DESCRIPTION ANUiNTiKr . : :
Requires Federal Agencies conducting or supporting activities
affecting the coastal zone to conduct/support those activities to the
maximum extent possible in a manner consistent with approved
state coastal management programs.
Protects ecologically sensitive coastal barriers along the U.S.
coasts.
Prohibits new Federal expenditures or financial assistance for
development within the established Coastal Barrier Resources
System.
Establishes a system of National Wilderness areas.
Prohibits motorized equipment; structures, installations, roads,
commercial enterprises, aircraft landings, and mechanical
transport in the National Wilderness Areas.
Requires Federal agencies to consider the adverse effects of their
program on farmland preservation, including the extent to which
programs contribute to unnecessary and irreversible conversion of
farmland to non-aericultural uses.
Minimizes destruction, loss, degradation of wetlands.
Preserves and enhances natural and beneficial values of wetlands.
Requires Federal Agencies to consider alternatives to wetlands
sites and limit potential damage if an activity affecting a wetland
cannot be avoided.
Requires Federal Agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long
and short term adverse impacts associated with occupancy and
modification of floodplains.
^^BsSiNTsnnoEnsPGn'^*
'' *:. AGENCIES":- -:.'.
Office of Ocean and Coastal
Resource Management
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Bureau of Land Management
National Park Service
Forest Service
Soil Conservation Service
Each Federal Agency must
prepare its own implementing
procedures
Each Federal Agency must
prepare its own implementing
procedures
IMPLEMENTING1 1
REGULATIONS I
15 CFR Part 930, H
Subpart D
15 CFR Part 923
U.S. Department of
Interior Coastal Barrier
Act Advisory Guidelines
43 CFR Parts 19 and
8560
50 CFR Parts 35. 2 19,
261 and 293
7 CFR 658
40 CFR Part 6,
Appendix A
40 CFR Part 6.
Appendix A
Figure 2-6A
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 3 - NEPA PROCEDURES
Table of Contents
PARAGRAPH PARAGRAPH
TITLES NUMBERS
Actions Requiring Evaluation 3.1
Environmental Review Categories , 3-1.
Determining Appropriate Environmental Documentation 3-1
Documentation Procedures : 3.3
Integration of EPA Planning 3.5
.Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements . 3-6
FIGURE FIGURE
TITLES NUMBERS
Data Collection and Analysis to Determine Review Procedure 3-1
Categorical Exclusion Documentation Procedures 3-2
Environmental Assessment Documentation Procedures . . 3-3
Environmental Impact Statement Documentation Procedures 3-4
EPA Process Review and Filing Requirements ; 3-5
3-i
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 3 - NEPA PROCEDURES
NEPA requires specific documentation, distribution, and public comment procedures
and time frames for each type of environmental review (i.e., CX, EA, or EIS). This chapter
explains these procedures and highlights unique requirements for each type of review.
1. ACTIONS REQUIRING EVALUATION.
EPA is required to comply with the environmental review requirements of 40 Code of
CFR Part 6 regulations. As noted in 40 CFR Part 6, Subpart I, examples of EPA facility
management actions requiring review include special purpose construction projects and
associated construction related activities as well as improvements and modifications to
facilities that have potential environmental effects external to the facilities.
Actions excluded from EPAB responsibility include those for which EPAB or the
Regional Office do not have full financial responsibility. For these other projects, the
responsible EPA office [i.e., Office of Research and Development (ORD)] or other Federal
agency will prepare the environmental review documents. This includes projects performed
for EPA by GSA using Federal Building Fund monies. Those environmental reviews will be
carried out under the procedures of the appropriate responsible agency or EPA office.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CATEGORIES.
The EPA project manager should use the best available information to determine
which type of environmental review is required for a particular management activity., The
types of reviews include the following:
a. Deviations (emergencies);
b. CXs;
c. EAs; and
e. EISs.
The section below discusses the process to determine which of these types of review is
appropriate for each proposed action.
3. DETERMINING APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION.
First, the EPA project manager should determine whether the proposed action meets
the criteria for an Emergency Deviation. There may be emergency situations when actions
3-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
with significant impacts must be taken without observing standard NEPA procedures. On
these occasions, EPAB or the regional office must inform the AA/OE before taking any
action. The EPA project manager must consider any possible alternatives to the emergency
action and must limit actions to those that are necessary to control the immediate impact of
the emergency. The AA/OE, in turn, will consult with CEQ and respond to the project
request.
There are also some EIS statutory exemptions that could be available in certain
circumstances. The availability of such an exemption should be determined by the Office of
General Counsel.
If the proposed action does not involve either of these two situations, the EPA project
manager must review the action for potential environmental impacts in determining the type
of environmental document(s) required for the project.
The first step is to review the proposed action for eligibility as a CX. This requires an
evaluation of the action against a list of general categories of actions that EPA has previously
found to have no significant impacts. If eligible, the documentation is completed, following
the guidelines presented in Chapter 4, and the action can proceed. If the action is not
eligible, then the decisionmaking process as to whether an EA or EIS is necessary should
proceed with the project review as presented in Figure 3-1.
This process includes reviewing the best available background information on both the
proposed action and the affected environment. Information on the proposed action may
include NEPA documentation from other related EPA projects and project specifications being
developed by the B&F project manager for the action. To characterize the affected
environment, local and regional authorities may provide resources such as approved master
plans, demographic information, wetland and floodplain inventories, and traffic studies. If
these materials are sufficient to provide the necessary detail to determine the absence of
significant impacts, then additional studies are not required and an EA may be prepared.
When significant impacts are anticipated, however, an EIS must be prepared to study
each significant issue. These studies are required to provide the necessary detail and analysis
on impacts, alternatives, and the basis to make assessments of the significant issues and
mitigation strategies.
Should the proposed action be similar or identical to another action previously studied
(i.e., expansion of a facility), time and paperwork can be greatly reduced by including other
EPA offices in planning and conducting the environmental reviews or adopting portions of
other EISs for similar EPA actions (see 40 CFR 51506.3). In addition, review existing
facility environmental documents to determine if they are sufficient to allow the EPA project
manager to make an informed decision, or if a supplemental EIS or an EA amendment is
necessary.
3-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
4. DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES.
Following the determination on the type of environmental review required by NEPA,
the EPA project manager must comply with the procedures outlined below. Figures 3-2, 3-3,
and 3-4 present:
a. Step-by-step EPA procedures for each type of review process;
b. NEPA procedure timelines to present each step's relative timing and duration,
as well .as the total process time frame; and
c. EPA project, planning and design timelines to assist in understanding the
facility management and NEPA process interrelationships.
These figures also provide all mandatory and average time frames for each review.
The time frames presented in these figures identify both the NEPA procedure timeline and the
EPA project planning and design timeline.
a. Categorical Exclusions. A CX is an action that EPA has determined to have
no significant environmental impacts. Actions generally included are:
(1) Minor rehabilitation of existing facilities;
(2) Functional replacement of equipment; and
(3) Construction of new ancillary facilities adjacent to or appurtenant to
existing facilities.
To meet the procedural requirements of NEPA, the EPA project manager for
the proposed action first submits a form (see Figure 4-1, NEPA Review for an EPA Facility
Alteration or Construction Project Form), a brief description of the proposed action and a
statement as to how the action qualifies as a CX. The EPAB Chief or the RA or AA reviews
the submittal and approves or denies the exclusion. If the CX is approved or denied, the
responsible official documents the decision. (See Chapter 4 for details.) Figure 3-2
summarizes the CX process and how it should be integrated into the B&F project planning
process.
to develop a new category of actions for CXs, a request must be made in
writing to the AA/OE. If the proposed new category is approved by the AA, it is published
in the FR as a proposed rule. The publication of a new category of action for CXs, includes
a 30-day public comment period prior to a final rulemaking.
3-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
The request for a CX will be denied if the action is not available for CX. A
CX may be denied by the responsible official if the proposed action no longer meets the CX
requirements due to changes in the proposed action; new evidence is presented which
indicates serious local or environmental issues; or violation of Federal, State, local, or tribal
laws. Actions that do not typically qualify for a CX include actions that will have a
significant effect on the quality of human environment, either individually or cumulatively
over time. Examples of actions include those which affect cultural resources, endangered or
threatened species, and environmentally important natural resource areas such as floodplains
or wetlands.
b. Environmental Assessments. When an action does not meet the criteria for a
CX, an EA should be prepared. If preliminary review of an action reveals obvious significant
environmental impacts, however, the review process should proceed directly to an EIS. If the
determination of significant impacts is questionable or if the impacts can be mitigated, an EA
may be appropriate. The end result of an EA is a FNSI or a determination that there are
significant impacts, hence, requiring an EIS. Figure 3-3 summarizes the EA process and
presents the time frame for its preparation.
The EA and FNSI should be maintained on-site at the facility and either by the
EPAB Chief for Headquarters actions or by the RA for regional actions or AA for program
actions. Furthermore, it should be available for public review. The EA and FNSI should be
published in local media (i.e., newspapers, fact sheets) and in the FR if the action is of
national significance. No action should be taken on a project until the prescribed 30-day
comment period for a FNSI has elapsed and all the comments have been considered.
Lastly, EA amendments also may be prepared to reflect changes in the scope of
actions for a facility where an EA has been completed. The procedural requirements are the
same for EAs and EA amendments.
c. Environmental Impact Statements. The procedures for the planning,
development, distribution, and public involvement for an EIS usually takes 8 to 18 months to
complete. Because the need for an EIS indicates that significant impacts are anticipated, the
analysis, documentation, and public participation procedures must be implemented and
coordinated in order to ensure that the goals of the NEPA process are achieved and the
project is completed on schedule. The EPA and CEQ regulations are explicit in the
procedural requirements for EIS preparation and review. Figure 3-4 summarizes these
requirements and also presents the design process time frames.
The EIS process is initiated with the preparation, distribution, and publication
of an NOI in the FR. The OFA will receive the original NOI and arrange for its publication
in the FR. Publication of the NOI initiates the public scoping process.
3-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
A public scoping meeting may be conducted or written comments may be
requested for identifying the scope and significant issues to be covered in the EIS.
Throughout the EIS preparation process, comments are received and any appropriate issues
are incorporated into the scope of the environmental review. To fully assess the extent of
impacts of a proposed action, the EPA project manager may employ the services of qualified
contractors/consultants to perform technical, unbiased specific impact studies and impact
analysis. The studies evaluate all available background information and new data to
determine the scope of the project (i.e., alternatives, anticipated impacts). These studies, in
turn, are used to develop a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and FEIS.
The DEIS is reviewed and commented on during an official 45-day review
period. A public hearing must also be held. These public hearings are held at least 30 days
after a notice of availability of the EIS is published by the OE in the FR.
All comments received on the DEIS are responded to in the FEIS. The FEIS is
prepared and distributed for a 30 day review and comment period. Using all available
information (DEIS, FEIS, public comments, etc.) the EPA office makes its decision and
documents this decision in a ROD.
In addition, a supplemental EIS may be prepared to augment an existing EIS.
The supplemental EIS has the same NEPA requirements as the EIS; however, there is no
requirement for a scoping process. Generally, supplements are required if EPA makes
substantial project changes relevant to environmental concerns or mere are significant new
circumstances involving environmental concerns related to the project.
5. INTEGRATION OF EPA PLANNING.
The environmental review process can take a few months to over a year to complete.
Therefore, to reduce or eliminate project delays, effective planning of a proposed action
should include the early initiation of the environmental review processes.
In many cases, the length of time devoted to the environmental review is proportional
to size of the proposed action. An action resulting in a CX, for example, may be a relatively
small project. On the other hand, a large project, such as the construction of a new
laboratory, may have potentially significant environmental effects and require a mitigation
program. The initiation and planning of such a project will be greater and, therefore, the EPA
project manager must allow for months of independent study, public meetings, and several
public and agency comment periods prior to developing detailed design documents.
Environmental planning and integration procedures, therefore, may provide more effective
budgeting and resource management and allow the project to continue on schedule.
3-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
The NEPA regulations allow EPA some discretion in implementing a NEPA program.
There are, however, many mandated procedures within the regulations that have been
summarized in Figure 3-5 for reference.
6. MITIGATION AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS.
Mitigation measures are techniques designed to minimize the impacts of development
on the environment. According to CEQ regulations, mitigation includes:
a. Avoiding impacts by not performing a certain action or parts of an action;
b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action;
c. Repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment;
d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the project period; and
e. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or
environments.
Specific examples of mitigation measures are modifying the building design to include
additional noise barriers for the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) fans.
Mitigation measures should be evaluated and included as a component of an alternative based
on the significance of the anticipated impact for each factor (i.e., air, waste, energy,
socioeconomic, water). If the factor does not pose a significant impact, mitigation measures
generally will not be necessary.
All mitigation measures should be included in the alternatives evaluation section
within the EA or EIS. The final selected mitigation measures should be documented by the
responsible official in the ROD or in the FNSI. These measures may include attaining or
exceeding specific Federal, State, or local standards; attaining applicable permits; and
implementing additional actions that may avoid, minimize, repair, reduce, or compensate for
environmental (i.e., human and natural) impacts.
In order to assure that these mitigation measures are being conducted as stated in the
ROD or FNSI, the responsible official should provide a detailed monitoring program in these
decision summaries. This program may include a progress tracking system to ensure that the
measures are followed within the time periods stated. Examples .of CEQ monitoring
techniques include the following:
a. Listing appropriate conditions in the ROD or FNSI and include those
appropriate conditions in grants, permits, or other approvals;
3-6
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
b. Making mitigation a condition of Agency funding;
c. Making the results of monitoring programs available to the public; and
d. Informing cooperating or commenting agencies on the progress of the
mitigation programs that were proposed and adopted.
3-7
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE REVIEW PROCEDURE
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
F«dmi. Sim. ma Utcit Htguiittm
SraSuvtyi
Euung Mruniain Plm
A«lan-Sp«cUc
EPAF
UHV
~
UwgiP
MOSitt
RMW md Arwlyi* Mammon tor Angapind tnpim
1
1
1
FnpmindputlaliNa
1
Conduct icapng
T
PrapmEIS
h
h
h
r
1
HIM ROD
|
I
| I
Figure 3-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES
.
Note:
SMol StopZ Step3 Sl«p4
Review Proponwrt Responsible Hesponsbto
pVoBM, Mtatts ^. adieu > A. """^ * "OP""*
""* proposed ravtm teue»CX ,pfocwdi
aetan: wpiadlonft «nd «Hlh«e«on
ubrnto background ooeurmnt*
opplkalnn data dacnion
NEPA
Procedure
Timeline
Project ConeiiMim and PmMnary Design Phoe DeWled De^gn Phan"
and Design M Months'
"Proponent" could be an EPA Facilities Office or a private developer receiving B&F assistance. If a non-Federal
entity is a proponent, preparation of an Environmental Information Document (BID) to assist EPA in preparing an
EA or an E1S will be necessary (see 40 CFR 6.105(b)). An EID would not be necessary if EPA issues a CX (see
40CFR6.107(a)).
Figure 3-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES
Review
Process
S»pl
Piopooon!
proposed
acton
Step 2
Collect
background
datairawew
and analyze
Step 3
Rnponslbto
official
need lor EA
Step 4
Prepare and
review drill
and final EA
Steps
Determine
ol Impacts
SlepS
II not
significant.
tosueFNSI
Sup 7
30-day wan
andpuWic
Steps
Proceed
with action A
and
monitoring
S«?
NEPA
Procedure
Timeline
S»PI M
SMP3 I
Step 6
Step?
Steps
1
Project
PIsnnlnQ
and Design
Timeline
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phi
Detailed Desgn Phase"
6-12 Months*
I Prefect Planning Initiation Sun ol Detailed Design
Stan ol Construction
Represents average protect planning/design tmelrame. special circumstances may affect periods cited herein.
~ DetaJed design phase may toe started earlier provried that the alternatives to the preferred action an conariered n the same detail.
....ftffrffffA
Note: "Proponent" could be an EPA Facilities Office or a private developer receiving B&F assistance. If a non-Federal
entity is a proponent, preparation of an Environmental Information Document (EID) to assist EPA in preparing an
EA or an EIS will be necessary (see 40 CFR 6.105(b)). An EID would not be necessary if EPA issues a CX (see 40
CFR 6.107(a)).
Figure 3-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Prepare and
puUsh
Notice ol
Intent (NOI)
InFRand
AA/OE
background
data; review
and analyze
NEPA
Procedure
Timeline
S-P1 M I
SUPS I
Jf
s»pio H-H
Protect
Planning
and Design
Timeline
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
Detailed Design Phase
~ tl
12-18 Months'
Project Planning littiaten
Stan ol Detailed Design ^ Stan ot Construction
Represents average project planning/design and construction start Iknetrame. special circumstances may affect periods died herein.
" Delated design phase may be started earlier provided that the alternatives to the preferred action are considered in the same detail.
' Average time to complete an EIS Is8-20 months, special circumstances may affect penods cued herein.
Note: "Proponent" could be an EPA Facilities Office or a private developer receiving B&F assistance. If a non-Federal entity
is a proponent, preparation of an Environmental Information Document (EID) to assist EPA in preparing an EA or an
EIS will be necessary (sec 40 CFR 6.105(b)]. An EID would not be necessary if EPA issues a CX [see 40 CFR
6.107(a)].
Figure 3-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
EPA PROCESS REVIEW AND FTLTNC, REQUIREMENTS
^Deviation
)
Responsible official requests clearance from Assistant Administrator, Office
of Enforcement (AA/OE).
AA/OE consults with CEQ, responds back to responsible official.
Proponent of action submits form to responsible official
If CX approved, responsible official completes the NEPA Review for an EPA
Facility Alteration and Construction Project Form; maintains the document
for public inspection
No public notification is required
For new CX category, responsible official or proponent requests in writing to
AA/OE who, in turn, publishes proposal in Federal Register as a> proposed
rule; 30 day public comment period prior to final rulemaking.
Environmental
Responsible official publishes FNSI in local media, distributes to requesters
and commentors; 30 day public comment period after publication and prior
to B&F project initiation.
Environmental
» "Impact. :
Statement .
Responsible official sends signed, original NOI to EPA, OE; OE submits NOI
to Federal Register for publication
DBS: Responsible official notifies OE of availability of DEIS, OE publishes
availability in Federal Register: 45 day public comment period; 30 day
minimum prior to public hearing on DEIS; 90 day waiting period for final
decision on proposed action.
FEIS: Responsible official notifies OE of availability of FEIS; OE publishes
availability of FEIS in Federal Register: 30 day public comment period before
issuance of ROD.
AH Els, including Supplemental EISs (SEISs): Responsible official submits
5 (five) copies to Director, OE, EIS Filing Section; this Office provides 1 (one)
copy to CEQ; responsible official submits 1 (one) copy to EPA, Office of
Federal Activities for review.
Note: "Proponent" could be an EPA Facilities Office or a private developer receiving B&F assistance. If a non-Federal
entity is a proponent, preparation of an Environmental Information Document (EID) to assist EPA in preparing an
EA or an EIS will be necessary [see 40 CFR 6.105(b)]. An EID would not be necessary if EPA issues a CX [see 40
CFR 6.107(a)].
Figure 3-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 4 - NEPA DOCUMENTATION
Table of Contents
PARAGRAPH PARAGRAPH
TITLES NUMBERS
Required Records and Documents 4-1
Categorial Exclusions 4-1
Environmental Assessments ; 4-1
Environmental Impact Statements 4-2
FIGURE FIGURE
TITLES NUMBERS
NEPA Review for an EPA Facility Alteration or Construction Project Form 4-1
Categorical Exclusion Overview 4-2
Environmental Assessment Overview 4-3
Finding of No Significant Impact Overview 4-4
Notice of Intent and Notice of Availability Overview 4-5
Example of a Notice of Intent 4-6
Environmental Impact Statement Overview : - ;.. 4-7
Record of Decision Overview 4-8
4-i
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 4 - NEPA DOCUMENTATION
1. REQUIRED RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS.
This chapter presents the specific components of each major document type discussed
in Chapter 3 (i.e., CX, EA, EIS). It also identifies the content of supplementary documents
(i.e., BID, NOI, FNSI, ROD) to ensure that each B&F project is in compliance with the
documentation requirements stated in EPA's NEPA regulations.
2. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
DOCUMENTS.
In order to comply with EPA's CX documentation requirements, the B&F project
manager should complete the NEPA Review for EPA Facility Alteration or Construction
Project Form (presented as Figure 4-1 at the end of the chapter). This form, if approved, will
serve as the required environmental review document. Additional detailed information on CX
documentation is contained in Figure 4-2. If the proponent of the action is a non-Federal
entity, preparation of an Environmental Information Document (BID) to assist EPA in
planning an EA or EIS is necessary [40 CFR 6.105(b)].
Projects that do not qualify for CX or for actions where a CX has been revoked must
undergo further environmental review. This review may include starting the EA or the EIS
process.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS.
The EA provides data to determine whether an EIS or FNSI is required. Preparing a
formal EA is not necessary in cases where EPA determines that an EIS will be automatically
prepared,. Figure 4-3 presents detailed documentation requirements for an EA. Each EA
should be tailored to the site-specific proposed actions (i.e., size, scope, level of detail for
each impact). It is not as detailed as an EIS. It must contain a brief discussion of the need
for the project, alternatives, environmental impacts of the proposed action, and a listing of
agencies and persons consulted. Amending an existing EA also may be appropriate, if an EA
has been conducted for the facility on a similar action.
If an EA is prepared and it is determined the proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the environment, then a FNSI must be issued. The FNSI is typically
published in a local newspaper of general circulation. EPA's NEPA regulations at 40 CFR
§6.400(d) require that a FNSI be made available to the public in accordance with CEQ's
NEPA regulations at 40 CFR §1506.6, which list mandatory and recommended methods to
inform suggested audiences. The purpose of a FNSI is to explain why a proposed action will
not have a significant impact on the environment and states the mitigation actions, if any.
4-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Figure 4-4 presents detailed documentation requirements for a FNSI and Figure 4-5 provides
an example for reference.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS.
An EIS presents an evaluation of a proposed action and alternatives in significantly
greater detail than an EA because of the significant impacts anticipated. It advises decision
makers and the public of the realistic options that would reduce or eliminate adverse
environmental impacts or, possibly, enhance the quality of the human environment. An EIS
is prepared: (1) If the EA determines that an undertaking may have a significant impact on
the environment, or (2) It is foreseen that an EA would determine that a proposed action may
have a significant impact on the environment. In the latter case, preparation of an EA is not
necessary.
Presented below are documents that comprise die EIS process.
a. Notice of Intent (NOIVNotice of Availability (NOA). The first step in
preparing an EIS is the NOI. The NOI announces that an EIS is being planned and requests
comments on the proposed action, including the scope of the action, reasonable alternatives,
and potential impacts. The NOI signifies the beginning of the scoping process. This process
is further discussed in Chapter 5. Figure 4-6 presents detailed documentation requirements
for an NOI and Figure 4-7 provides an example for reference.
Additionally, NOAs of the DEIS and FEIS require the same documentation
requirements as an NOI. The scope for the announcement, however, differs. It covers the
EIS availability, EPA point of contact (POC) for the proposed action, notice of the DEIS
public hearing, and time frames for review and comment for the EIS. -
b. Draft and Final EIS. The next step is to prepare a DEIS, and following receipt
of comments on the DEIS, a FEIS is developed. These DEISs and FEISs should be
developed using the documentation requirements highlighted in Figure 4-8. Provided below
are specific details of the contents presented in Figure 4-7.
The cover sheet must not exceed one page identifying EPA's Office of
Administration and Resources Management (OARM) and any cooperating agencies; the title
of the proposed action; the name, telephone number, and location of the EPA project
manager; date by which comment must be received, a designation of the statement as a draft,
final, or draft or final supplement; and one paragraph abstract describing the purpose, need,
alternatives, and significant consequences of the action.
The executive summary should normally be less than 15 pages, stressing the
major conclusions, areas of controversy, and unresolved issues. It should also list any permits
4-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
or licenses that must be obtained and a statement of compliance with all applicable
environmental programs. Graphic presentation of the information is encouraged.
The purpose and need section should present the problem being addressed by
the action, how the action and alternatives would resolve the problem, and specifically, the
benefits of the proposed action. If applicable, the cost-benefit analysis should be referenced
here or included as an appendix. This section should contain a summary of the social,
economic, and environmental objectives of the action. Also, information on risks, or hazards
and general environmental compliance in regard to environmental regulations such as the
Clean Air Act or Clean Water Act should be included. These environmental compliance
studies used in preparation of the EIS are therefore cited within the document.
The alternatives section should present a comparative analysis of the
consequences of proposed action, reasonable alternatives, and of no-action. To provide a
clear basis for choice among the alternatives, graphic or tabular presentation of the
comparative analysis is encouraged. A brief discussion of alternatives that were not
considered should be presented and include the reasons for eliminating them.
The affected environment section presents the baseline conditions for all
relevant issues (i.e., human and natural environment) against which the effects of the
proposed action and alternatives are compared, while the environmental consequences section
provides the scientific data and analysis for the direct and indirect effects of the alternatives
on the affected environment. These sections, in turn, are used to-support the comparative
analysis of alternatives section.
Overall, it is important that an EIS be analytic, but not encyclopedic in nature,
and that the bulk of the body of the EIS focuses on the relevant and significant issues. The
text of a final EIS addressing purpose and need, alternatives, affected environment, and
environmental consequences should normally be less than 150 pages. For proposals of
unusual scope or complexity, this text should normally be less than 300 pages. Material
prepared in connection with an EIS that substantiates fundamental analyses or is otherwise
analytic and relevant to the Agency's decision may be included in appendices (see 40 CFR
§1502.18). Material not prepared in connection with the EIS that is reasonably available for
inspection by potentially interested persons may be incorporated by reference (see 40 CFR
§1502.21).
c. Record of Decision. The ROD is documented and distributed following the
completion of the FEIS. It states the EPA's official decision on the action and identifies
applicable mitigation and monitoring actions required. Figure 4-9 presents detailed
documentation requirements for a ROD and Appendix E provides an example for reference.
4-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
April 1994
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA) REVIEW FORM FOR FACILITY
ALTERATION OR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TEPA 3300-16 (5-92)1
(PAGE 1)
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington. DC 20460
a^FP^V National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review Form
Facility Alteration or Construction Project
1. General Information
Title of Protect
Project Officer Name Title
Location (ctty/county/state)
Project Number
Phone Number
Part of EPA Facility. 'Yes or No1 (it yes. give name of Facility)
II. Responsible Official tor NEPA Review: (Name. Title. Phone Number)
Unto' fltoflfutiMfJiLi ntttflml mi mf IM ffM f*hfat FiwtfnaflrfiMf Dfannliu* aiMf 4r*fcJfai*hfM AM**!* ICl
>AB), It EPAB approval Is required;
Director, Regional Administrator, etc.)
III. Name, Hie, phone number of contact for environmental review on this project (if different from responsible official)
IV. A. Categorical Exclusion Criteria (Check "Yes or No')
Yes/No
I | | a Project is directed solely toward minor rehabilitation of existing facility, consists ol
to existing facility.
[ | [ b. Project does not directly or indirectly affect: cultural resource areas; endangered
species; or environmentally important natural resource areas, such as wetlands o
responsible official requires additional detail on this criteria, see 40 CFR Part 6. 1C
| | | d Planned operations to be carried out at facility will not significantly impact the hun
Hem IVB is signed, will constitute a documented categorical exclusion determination under NEPA. and
retained as part of the project file.
If the answer to any one of these questions is Wo. "an environmental assessment (EA) s required (prt
functional
acent or appurtenant
or threatened
ffloodplains,etc.(tf
17).
nan environment
m, when item IVA is completed and
no further action is required to be
xeed to item V).
IV. B. Categorical Exclusion Determination
/ have determined that this project is eligible for categorical exclusion from the substantive environmental review requirements under
EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 6.
Signature and Title of Responsible Official
EPA 3300-16 (5-92)
Figure 4-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
April 1994
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT fNEPA) REVIEW FORM FOR FACILITY
NATION OR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TEPA 3300-16 (5-92M
(PAGE 2)
m implementing thsmcticti. the Response Offi^
measures mat «dl be undertaken to avoid sjgrareant enwonrnental onpacts. These measures must be documented.
A. Does the protect meal any of trie following criteria to preparation of an BS7 (Check-YesorNo')
Attach dbcurnento&on to support dans a thnugh k, ss apprcpnato.
Yes/No
1 1 1 a The pra^ may significafty affect Iha patterned
1 1 1 b. The effects resulting from any structijrewtecaitya)^^
1 ' ' state tend use plans or poficies.
constructed or operated under the proposed action may be located in wetands.
I | | e. The project may directly cause or Induce changes that significantly: (a) displace human populations, (b) alter the character of the exstrng
land.
water or oroundwatBr quahty or quantity, water supply, fish. sheBfBh. wikftfe and tha» natural habtots
m,
significant. .
the case. rtBfMt necessary to sign and cffcutate Dm form Instead, a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS should be puMohedh the Fatal BaojsM- .
VI. Mndinpj of No Significant Impact
inas^nifixanteflectonthenurnanenvironmenL Trperefore. an EIS will not be prepared
Comments supporting or disagreeing with this decision may be submitted to EPA for consideration. Interested parties may contact me official identified m dam V.C.
days after release of this Finding of No Significant Impact
Signature of Responsible Official. Title and Data
EPA 3300-16 (5.92)
,
Figure 4-1A
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION OVERVIEW
. ... .''
Scope. '
Reviews
categorical
exclusion
criteria.
Content \*
Provides a
checklist to
determine
reasonableness
of a categorical
exclusion.
TuMic Participation
Project-specific CXs do
not provide for public
review; however, EPA
provides for public
review before adopting
new CX criteria.
1ftricalNo.
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
^T ;-'iP=; "** '"'
^.^POA;. -A-
Summarizes
environmental impacts
to determine need for:
Further study
Mitigation
measures.
".* " .'. *
'" .Scope -.'.
Reviews all
environ-
mental
impacts (e.g.,
natural and
human
impacts).
" :: "" ' ' ": '
/^'Codtent '-.-:-':..: "..' '
Describes and identifies:
Purpose and need for
the proposed action;
Proposed action;
Alternatives considered
(including the no action
alternative);
Affected environment
(baseline conditions);
Environmental
consequences of the
proposed action and
alternatives;
Agencies and persons
consulted.
.-.. Public
Participation .
EA is provided for
review upon request
or as an attachment
to the FNSI.
Typical N
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OVERVIEW
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
. .:** fe A." .''.-"
?*: ;,.'& <&.
- -**wfie2
Notifies the
public of EA
results and
mitigation
plans.
UT- . 'A-- *£ ' ?<: «
*. '.Scope :sf-..--.
Explains why
an action will
not have a
significant effect
on the natural
f\m l%im\sn
or nuiTuin
environment.
... . . - " '*..... * f
: s6".'.~: <.::." ' .'^ ' - . ".-
'"- ".-*:': -. ' -" -.-.--r \
: : "":.:. Content .' ....
Explains why an action will not
have a significant effect on the
environment.
Describes mitigation measures
necessary to make the alternative
environmentally acceptable.
Attaches the EA or a summary of
the EA for reference.
Describes changes that have been
made in the proposed action to
eliminate significant impacts.
"-:':Public>^
:; Participation
30-day public
comment
period before
proceeding
with action.
:Tj?pfcal:No.:;
..'*if Pages J
1 or 2 pages.
Figure 4-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
NOTICE OF INTENT AND NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OVERVIFW
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
.-,.:;$;. . >*:;
.i-^ipbse'V
Announces to the
public that the EIS
process has begun
for a proposed
EPA action.
, "Scope; ;
Presents basic
information about
the:
EIS-
±*l»Jf
Scoping
process.
.;'. " Content
Describes:
Proposed action and possible
Altomativpc
Qlld lid 11 VC9
Proposed scoping process
including whether, when.
and where any scoping
meeting will be conducted
States an EPA point of
contact for public inquiries.
Public
Participation.
EPA
Publishes the
NOIin
Federal
Register.
^^^*0M^^^
TypicalNo.
of Pages
1 page.
r 0
Figure 4-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EXAMPLE OF A NOTICE OF INTENT
EPA 4841
April 1994
Federal Register / Vol. 50, NO 249 / Friday, December 27,1985 / Notices
[ER-FRL-2945-3]
Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement; Full Containment Facility;
Cincinnati, OH
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Preparation of an environmental
impact statement for the construction of a
full containment facility in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Purpose: In accordance with section
102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act, EPA has identified a need to
prepare an environmental impact statement
and therefore publishes this Notice of Intent
pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.7
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT: Russell Kulp, PE, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
Street, SW (PM-215-F), Washington, DC
20460, Telephone No: (202)382-2172.
Summary
1. Proposed EPA Action
It is the intent of the EPA to construct a
free standing full containment facility (FCF)
of approximately 7500 square feet on the site
of the Andrew W. Breidenbach
Environmental Research Center. The site is
located at 26 West St. Clair Street, Cincinnati,
Hamilton County, Ohio. The FCF is
proposed to accommodate the use and
handling of hazardous and toxic material
associated with a research and development
program. The facility will be designed to
~ tysically confine and control the associated
izardous and toxic materials.
ph
hai
2. Alternatives
a. No action.
b. Remodel the sixth floor of the
Andrew W. Breidenbach Environmental
Research Center to accommodate the use
and handling of hazardous and toxic
materials associated with a research and
development program.
c. The proposed action. The
construction of a free standing building
situated on the site of .the Andrew W.
Breidenbach Environmental Research
Center.
3. Issues Involved
a. Procedures for handling hazardous
and toxic materials and measures to be used
during emergency situations.
b. Additional traffic and transportation
of hazardous and toxic materials increasing
the probability for accidents and spills in a
highly populated area.
c. Discharge of hazardous and toxic
materials into the Metropolitan sewer
systems.
d. Effect on the surrounding community
of a serious accident in the FCF.
e. Discharge of hazardous and toxic
material into the air and its effect on the
surrounding community.
4. Scoping Process
The scope consists of the range of
proposed EPA actions and their potential
impact upon the surrounding community, to
be considered in the Environmental Impact
Statement (FJS). It is the intent that there
shall be an early and open process for
determining the scope of issues to be
addressed and for identifying the significant
environmental issues related to the proposed
action.
The scoping process shall consist of a
public meeting to be held February 4,1986,
at 6:30 p.m., in the Andrew W. Breidenbach
Environmental Research Center, 26 West St.
Clair Street, Cincinnati, Ohio. At mis
meeting the public will be invited to present
concerns they would like to see addressed in
the EIS.
5. Timing
EPA expects to issue a draft EIS for
public review and comment within
approximately three (3) months.
6. Request for Copies for the Draft EIS
All interested parties are encouraged to
submit their names and addresses to the
person indicated above for inclusion on the
distribution list for the draft EIS and related
public notices.
Dated: December 23,1965.
Allan Hirsch,
Director, Office of federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 85-30695 Filed 12-2645; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
Figure 4-6
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OVERVIEW
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
* ' " ''f&£ f ' '
Ok. '"%.:'.. ".'-*.
Provides
detailed
environmental
information to
the public for
input in EPA's
decision -
making
process.
Examines
alternatives
and potential
r
for mitigating
impacts.
- " ""
. Scope'
Provides a
comprehensive
review of all
impacts of the
proposed
action and
alternatives.
- :y
1 " ,. A' .....V
» . -.;:..
' Content <";.;. .
Includes the following:
Provides for a 45-day public
comment on the DEIS;
Requires a public hearing on
the DEIS not earlier than 30
days after issuance;
Provides for a 30-day review
period on the FEIS prior to
the agency's decision, which
is documented in a ROD;
Cover sheet;
Executive Summary;
Table of Contents;
Purpose and need for action;
Alternatives considered.
including proposed action;
Affected environment
(baseline conditions);
Environmental and
socioeconomic consequences
of alternatives
Coordination includes list
of agencies, organizations
and persons to whom copies
of the EIS are sent;
List of prcparcrs
Index;
Appendices.
Unless the responsible official
determines that there is a
compelling reason to change the
standard format.
Public .
'.Participation.
Provides for a
45-day public
comment
period between
the DEIS and
FEIS.
Requires a
public hearing
on the DEIS
not earlier than
30 days after
j
issuance.
Provides for a
30-day review
period on the
T*T*T£* a.
FEIS prior to
issuance of the
ROD.
TypicaiNo.
ofPages .
150 to 300
pages.
Figure 4-7
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
RECORD OF DECISION OVERVIEW
^I&£: '!|«oo. ""' ^ok
/v»» Y.. . .wv" *'*.. **" '.
jjR-Eittipo&^..:^.
Announces the
Agency's
decision
regarding the
proposed major
EPA action.
;-' *-. ':£. * -:ii ;
.... .-> ...^ -.**S.. -
^/^Scope,:. .4^1
States EPA's
decision and
the basis for
the decision.
Summarizes
theEIS
analyses and
selected
mitigation
measures.
**£>*?-.,;." .,.-' '"*%**?
' ": ..1s»'S^ T ^ "'.
, : :..'.-v-;i^Coirtent ...:.-.. . ">--.
Documents EPA's decision.
based on the DEIS, FEIS, and
all comments received.
States EPA's preferred
alternative.
Identifies alternatives
considered by EPA.
States whether all precautions
to avoid or minimize harm to
the environment were
considered, and if not, explains
why environmental
precautions were not taken.
Explains, when appropriate.
the mitigation monitoring
programs.
df-Page££
1 to 5 pages.
Figure 4-8
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 5 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND THE SCOPING PROCESS
Table of Contents
PARAGRAPH PARAGRAPH
TITLES NUMBERS
Categorical Exclusion/Environmental Assessment/Finding of No
Significant Impact Public Involvement 5-1
Environmental Impact Statement/Record of Decision Public Involvement 5-2
Aids to Public Communication and Information Gathering 5-4
FIGURE FIGURE
TITLES NUMBERS
Public Participation During the Enviromental Assessment/
Finding No Significant Impact Process 5-1
Public Participation During the Environmental Impact
Statement Process 5-2
Environmental Impact Statement Public Participation Methods 5-3
5-i
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CHAPTER 5 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND THE SCOPING PROCESS
A major goal of NEPA is to include the public in EPA's decisionmaking process. The
public include, but are not limited to, interested citizens and groups; developers;
Federal, State, and local officials; elected officials; and environmental groups. When
appropriate, Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), developed under the
Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-Know Act (SARA Title III), may be a good
avenue to obtain public involvement in the scoping process, since LEPCs are required to
develop comprehensive contingency plans taking into account methods for determining the
population potentially affected by releases of hazardous materials. In this process LEPC's
already consider sensitive areas or populations and LEPCs often consist of elected officials,
response personnel (fire, police, and rescue), as well as the general public.
The level and timing of public involvement varies depending on the type of NEPA
documentation required by the action (i.e., EA, EIS). Generally, an EA provides the public
an opportunity to review the assessment and preferred alternative in conjunction with the
FNSI, while an EIS provides a continuing opportunity to exchange information throughout the
process, starting with scoping. Overall, public involvement may include information
exchange or mutual interaction. It is essential to an effective and informed NEPA
decisionmaking process.
1. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/FINDING OF
NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.
There is no public review period or public announcement for CX determinations.
However, copies of CX determinations are available to the public upon request, according to
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
The availability of the EA/FNSI and supporting information should be announced in
newspapers and fact sheets, and when an action has national significance, the EA/FNSI
should be published in the FR. These documents should be available for review at local
libraries, on-site, or at another public establishment that has copying machines and that is
open during evening hours. This approach assures information exchange, allows timely
reviews of the documents, and encourages feedback to EPA.
Figure 5-1 below highlights the EPA regulatory time frames for public review of the
EA/FNSI, including the preferred alternative and associated mitigation and monitoring
programs, and supporting information used in developing the documents. As shown in the
figure, there must be a minimum of 30 days between the release of a FNSI and taking action
on a proposed project.
5-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/RECORD OF DECISION PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT.
The first step in an effective EIS public involvement process is to develop a
comprehensive project public involvement plan. The plan should be developed based on the
size, magnitude, scope, .anticipated controversy, level of control, meeting facilities, and timing
of the proposed action. Components of the plan may include a mailing list of persons
interested or affected by the project, the frequency of mailings to these parties, the type and
format of information to be made available, and location(s) of information for public review.
Project managers should design public involvement activities after considering the following
NEPA requirements:
a. Make diligent efforts to solicit from and provide appropriate information to the
public;
b. Inform those persons and agencies who may be interested or affected, and
allocate assignments for preparation of the EIS among the lead and cooperating agencies;
c. Provide timely public notice of scoping meetings, hearings, or workshops (i.e.,
NOI) and availability of environmental documents (i.e., FNSI, DEIS, FEIS, ROD);
d. Provide information that will assist the public understanding of the project;
public involvement is not public relations;
e. Determine the scope and significant issues to be analyzed and identify and
eliminate from detailed study the issues which are not significant or which have been covered
by prior environmental review;
f. Identify other environmental review requirements to ensure the concurrent
preparation of environmental studies that will be integrated within the EIS;
g. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation o£ environmental
analyses and the agency's decisionmaking schedule.
Minimum requirements for public involvement may not be sufficient for all projects;
therefore, project managers should consider supplementing basic communication methods to
suit the needs of each project. Additional methods are described in Section 3 of this Chapter.
Once a plan has been developed, the EPA project manager begins the scoping process.
Scoping is a process that fosters participation and input from the public and other agencies
and provides a forum for exchange of, information. Advantages to an early and open scoping
process may include identifying technical information and additional reasonable alternatives,
or narrowing the significant issues to be addressed in the EIS. Scoping also may help
5-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
determine whether an EIS is necessary for a proposed action or whether an EA is sufficient.
Lastly, scoping provides opportunities for interested and affected parties to request additional
document review times or page limits on the documents.
Figure 5-2 presents basic steps of the EIS process and highlights timing and duration
of public participation activities.
Following the decision to proceed with an EIS, the EPA project manager publishes a
NOI in the FR. The NOI states an overview of the proposed action, alternatives being
considered, potential significant impacts, and an EPA contact for the project. If a scoping
meeting is a component of the public involvement plan, the NOI also announces the time and
place of the meeting. At the scoping meeting(s), EPA provides-additional background on the
project and then solicits input from those interested and affected parties attending in order to:
a. Determine the scope and significant issues to be analyzed;
b. Identify and eliminate insignificant issues and those covered in previous
environmental reviews; and
c. Indicate any otherNEAs or EISs that are being conducted, have been conducted
or are planned, which are related to but not part of the action under consideration.
Scope refers to a range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in
the EIS. Once the scope of the project and any related activities have been identified, the
EPA project manager prepares a DEIS. The EPA project manager then announces the
availability of the DEIS to all interested and affected parties using a newspaper announcement
or a FR notice. All EIS references and supporting information used in developing the EIS
should be available for review at local libraries, on-site, or at another public establishment
open during evening work hours to assure effective information availability.
- . The next step in the process is a 45-day public review and comment period (30
days of which are for review of the DEIS prior to the public hearing and the remaining 15
days are to allow for comments following the public hearing). The review period is
computed based on OFA's FR notice announcing the EISs filed in a given week (see 40 CFR
§1506.10, 6.4011). The responsible official may independently extend the review period and
must inform OFA of the extensions as soon as possible. If the responsible official extends
the review period, OFA must be informed as soon as possible. The EPA project manager
must take into consideration all comments received from the public and respond to the
substantive comments in the FEIS.
5-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Following the completion of the FEIS, the EPA project manager announces the
FEIS and supporting information availability. The announcement should be provided to the
public in the same manner as the DEIS announcement to ensure consistency of the .release.
The period of review, again, is based on OFA's EIS FR notice. The public then reviews the
FEIS within a 30-day comment period. After the 30-day period, the EPA project manager
may issue the final decision in a ROD and initiate the proposed action. The ROD, in turn,
should be provided to all parties who submitted comments on the DEIS or FEIS.
Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 6.401 (b), final agency decisions shall not be
made until the later of the following dates: (1) 90 days after the beginning date of the draft
EIS review period established by OFA's weekly FR notice (see 40 CFR §6.401 (a)); or, (2) 30
days after the beginning date of the final EIS review period established by OFA's FR notice.
3. AIDS TO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION GATHERING.
The public communication/participation processes summarized above also may be
supplemented by including relevant aids provided'in this section. Specifically, this section
presents examples of public interaction tools and prescribes alternative methods to establish
effective two-way communications.
Figure 5-3 presents five examples of supplementary initiatives to provide
communication links between EPA and those interested or affected by EPA proposed actions.
These mechanisms, if conducted together, provide a comprehensive plan because they build
relations and trust, and establish an effective communication network. The EPA project
managers should identify appropriate initiatives tailored to fit particular situations (i.e., tours
of project areas, development of community task forces to assist in reviewing or studying
aspects projects, issuance of fact sheets in local newspapers).
5-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DURING THE EA/FNSI PROCESS
fUBUl fAI
30 dif imaan oaimra pmd (or
morirfrMpomifeoBulpKinlD
HEFA DOCUMENTS:
tapontoOtal
^xadmCommMi
B*k)r« Tiling Amn
AwigtEAnMMi. MUonta
Figure 5-1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DURING THE EIS PROCESS
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
45-day minimum renex/cemmenl period |
Condud
'jfrday minimum before
puMcheamg
fimnuni bflfoiB
taking acton
NEPA DOCUMENTS:
tPutDBh
NO
Prepare
DEIS 1
Make
Available to
Pubic
Available to
Pubt
Avenge EIS Process. 8-20 Months
Figure 5-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EIS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION METHODS
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Functions
' Characteristics
Benefits
Public Involvement Plans.
Identifies affected public
Describes proposed action
Describes site background
Documents concerns,
interests, and
informational needs
Highlights planned public
involvement methods.
Prepare as early in the EIS
process as possible
Include both EPA and public
documents
Tailor to the specific project
Require proactive public
involvement
Include interviews with
representatives of the
interested/affected public.
Familiarizes project managers with the region and its
leaders
Establishes grounds for dialogues with leaders or
interested/affected public and provides a preview of
potential issues and mailing list
Supports the EPA's credibility with concerned
residents, officials, business representatives,
educators, and representatives of environmental and
other community organizations
Provides a measure of EPA accountability to the
community.
Project Mailing List
Tracks interest and allows
response to the
interested/affected public.
Begin during the preparation of
the public involvement plan or
project initiation.
Provides a tool to send correspondence, fact sheets,
copies of news releases, or other information
pertinent to the project
Provides an easily updated measure of public
interest and meeting attendance lists.
Information Repositories
Makes information easily
accessible to
interested/affected public
Establishes a convenient
localion(s) to house
information.
Assemble project-pertinent
information
Place in public/university
libraries, or on site
Make accessible and useful
(e.g., evening hours, copying
facilities)
Provide one or more depending
on area or degree of public
interest.
Enables public to comprehend the full scope of the
project and thoughtfully question, provide
information to, or advise EPA
Example Documents: 40 CFR Pans 6. and 1300-
1508, public involvement plan, NOI, scoping
meeting summary. DEIS and impact study reports,
reference materials, fact sheets, other relevant
reports, responses to comments, FEIS. and ROD.
Pact Sheets
Supplements other
measures (e.g., NOI)
Describes project status
Provides documentation
on EIS actions
Identifies reports available
for review and meeting
Make concise (2-4 pages)
Summarize study results
Notify public of pending
actions/meetings
Send at least two-weeks in
advance of meetings or
comment periods.
Provides a communication lie between EPA and the
public between major activities
Provides information immediately following major
EIS milestones (e.g., scoping meeting, DEIS. FEIS)
Signifies the importance of the public and clarifies
the Agency's findings, position, and project needs.
z. ?«=
Formal and Informal Information Sessions. vf
Serves as an EPA
mechanism to report
progress and receive input
from public.
Conduct at or prior to major EIS
milestones
Hold on a formal (e.g., hearings)
or an informal basis (e.g., work
group).
Allows effective interaction
Strengthens rapport and public relationships
Allows EPA personnel and members of the public
opportunities to clarify and discuss points .
Figure 5-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX A
REFERENCE MATERIALS AND NEPA FACILITY MANAGEMENT
COMPLIANCE COORDINATORS
A-l
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX A
REFERENCE MATERIALS AND NEPA FACILITY MANAGEMENT
COMPLIANCE COORDINATORS
Reference Materials
Council On Environmental Quality/Executive Office of the President,
"Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act,"
40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 1500-1508, 1992.
"Forty Most Asked Questions Concerning CEQ's National Environmental Policy Regulations," 46
Federal Register No. 55, 18026-18038 March .16, 1981.
"The National Environmental Policy Act," 42 United States Code 4321; Amended by Public Law 94-
52, July 3, 1975; Public Law 94-83, August 9, 1975; and Public Law 97-258, Section 4(b),
September 13, 1982.
NEPA Deskbook. The Environmental Law Reporter, Environmental Law Institute, 1989.
"Procedures for Implementing the Requirements of the Council on Environmental Quality on the
National Environmental Policy Act," 40 Code of Federal Regulations Pan 6, July 1991.
Executive Order 11514, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality, March 5, 1970.
Executive Order 11991, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality, May 24, 1977.
NEPA Implementation Procedures, Appendices I, II, HI; Final Rule, 49 Federal Register. December
21, 1984.
NEPA Regulations: Incomplete or Unavailable Information, 51 Federal Register. April 26, 1986.
A-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NEPA Facility Management Compliance Coordinators
EPA Headquarters
Luther Mellen, ID
Chief, Engineering, Planning, and
Architecture Branch
EPA Headquarters
401 M. Street SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 260-2160
EPA Region 1
Gwen Ruta
One Congress Street
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 565-4423
EPA Region 2
Robert Hargrove
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(212) 264-1892
EPA Region 3
Diane Escher
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215)597-1196
EPA Region 4
Heinz Mueller
245 Courtland Street
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404) 347-3776
EPA Region 5
Bill Franz
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 886-7500
Joe Montgomery
Office of Federal Activities
EPA Headquarters
401 M. Street SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 260-8793
Regional Coordinators
EPA Region 6
Norman E. Thomas
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
(214) 655-2260
EPA Region 7
Walter Foster
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 551-7290
EPA Region 8
Rick Calaggett
999 18th St.
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 293-1572
EPA Region 9
Jacqueline Wyland
75 Hawthorne St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 744-1584
EPA Region 10
Gerry Opatz
1200 Sixth St.
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 533-8505
A-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX B
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
(42 U.S.C. 4341: AMENDED BY PL 94-52. JULY 3. 1975; PL 94-83. AUGUST 9. 1975)
B-l
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT
(42 USC 4321 et aeq.; amended by PL 94-52, July 3, 1975; PL
94-83, August 9, 1975)
Purpose
Sec. 2. (§4321) The purposes of this Act axe: To declare a
national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable
harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts
which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and
biosphere and stimulate the health urd welfare of man; to enrich
the understanding of the ecological systems and natural re-
sources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on
iffii*flJ Quality.
Title I
Declaration of National Environmental Policy .
Sec. 101. (§4331) (a) The Congress, recognizing the pro-
found impact of man's activity on the interrelations of all
components of the natural environment, particularly the pro-
found influences of population growth, high-density urbaniza-
tion, industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and new and
expanding technological advances and recognizing further the
critical importance of restoring and mf fa**fa fag environmental
quality to the overall welfare and development of man. declares
that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government, in
cooperation with State and local governments, and other
concerned public and private organizations, to use all practica-
ble rp*flnf and' measures, including fi*»»"""i and technical
B-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the
general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which
man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the
social, economic, and other requirements of present and future
generations of Americans.
(b) In order to carry out the policy set forth in this Act, it
is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to
use all practicable means, consistent with other essential
considerations of national policy, to improve and coordinate
Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end
that the Nation may
(1) fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as
trustee of the environment for succeeding generations;
(2) assure for all Americans' safe, healthful, produc-
tive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the
environment without degradation, risk to health or safety,
or other undesirable and unintended consequences;
(4) preserve important historic, cultural, and natural
aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, wherever
possible, an environment which supports diversity and
variety of individual choice;
(5) achieve a balance between population and re-
source use which will permit high standards of living and a
wide sharing of life's amnnifimi; and
(6) enhance the quality of renewable resources and
approach the tn^Timiim attainable recycling of depletable
(c) The Congress recognizes that each person should
enjoy. a healthful environment and each person has * responsi-
bility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of he
environment.
Sec. 102. (§4332) The Congress authorizes and directs that,
to the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regulations, and
public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and
administered hi accordance with the policies set forth in this
Act, and (2) all agencies of the Federal Government shall
B-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
(A) utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach
which will insure the integrated use of the natural and
social sciences and the environmental design, arts in
planning and in decisionmaking which may have an impact
on man's environment;
(B) identify and develop methods and procedures, in
consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality
established by title II of this Act, which will insure that
presently unquantified environmental amenities and values
may be given appropriate consideration in decisionmaking
along with economic and technical considerations:
(C) include in every recommendation or report on
proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions
significantly affecting the quality of the human environ-
ment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on
(i) the environmental impact of the proposed
action,
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
(D) Any detailed statement required under subpara-
graph (C) after January 1, 1970, for any major Federal
action funded under a program of grants to States shall not
be deemed to be legally insufficient solely by reason of
having been prepared by a State agency or official, i£
(i) the-State agency or official has statewide
jurisdiction and has the responsibility for such action,
(ii) the responsible Federal official furnishes
guidance and participates in such preparation,
(iii) the responsible Federal official independent*
ly evaluates such statement prior to its approval and
adoption, and
(iv) after January 1,1976, the responsible Feder-
al official provides early notification to. and solicits the
views of, any other State or any Federal land manage-
ment entity of any action or any alternative thereto
which may have significant impacts upon such State or
affected Federal land management entity and, if there
is any disagreement on such impacts, prepares a
written assessment of such impacts and views for
incorporation into such detailed statement.
The procedures in this subparagraph shall not relieve the
Federal official of his responsibilities for the scope, objec-
tivity, and content of the entire statement or of any other
responsibility under this Act; and further, this subpara-
graph does not affect the legal sufficiency of statements
prepared by State agencies with less than statewide juris-
diction.
(E) study, develop, and describe appropriate alterna-
tives to recommended courses of action in any proposal
which involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative
uses of available resources;
(F) recognize the worldwide and long-range character
of environmental problems and, where consistent with the
foreign policy of the United States, lend appropriate
support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs designed
to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and
B-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACUJTIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
preventing a decline in the quality of mankind's world
environment;
(G) make available to States, counties, municipali-
ties, institutions, and individuals, advice and information
useful in restoring, nmintaining,, and enhancing the quality
of the environment;
(H) initiate and utilize ecological information in the
planning and development of resource-oriented projects;
and
(I) assist the Council on Environmental Quality
established by title n of this Act.
Sec. 103. (§4333) All agencies of the Federal Government
shall review their present statutory authority, administrative
regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose
of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsist-
encies therein which prohibit full compliance with the purposes
and provisions of this Act and shall propose to the President not
later than July 1, 1971, such measures as may be necessary to
bring their authority and policies into conformity with the
intent, purposes, and procedures set forth in this Act
Sec. 104. (§4334) Nothing in Section 102 or 103 shall in any
way affect the specific statutory obligations of any Federal
agency (1) to comply with criteria or standards of environmental
quality, (2) to coordinate or consult with any other Federal or
State agency, or (3) to act, or refrain from acting contingent
upon thf pyr>ininundations or certification of any other Federal
or State agency.
Sec. 105. (§4335) The policies and goals set forth in this
Act are supplementary to those set forth in existing authoriza-
tions of Federal agencies.
Title n
Council on Environmental Quality
Sec. 201. (§4341) The President shall transmit to the
Congress, annually beginning July 1. 1970, an Environmental
Quality Report (hereinafter referred to as the 'report') which
shall set forth (1) the status and condition of the major natural,
manmade, or altered environmental classes of the Nation,
B-6
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACE-TITES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
including, but not limited to, the air, the aquatic, including
marine, estuarine, and fresh water, and the terrestrial environ-
ment, including, but not limited to, the forest dryland, wetland,
range, urban, suburban, and rural environment; (2) current and
foreseeable trends in the quality, management and utilization of
such environments and the effects of those trends on the social,
economic, and other requirements of the Nation; (3) the
adequacy of available natural resources for faifiiKng human and
economic requirements of the Nation in the light of expected
population pressures; (4) a review of the programs and activities
(inchiding regulatory activities) of the Federal Government, the
State and local governments, and nongovernmental entities or
individuals, with particular reference to their effect on the
environment and on the conservation, development and utiliza-
tion of natural resources; and (5) a program for remedying the
deficiencies of existing programs and activities, together with
for legislation*
Sec. 202. (S4342) There is created in the Executive Office of
the President a Council on Environmental Quality (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Council'). The Council shall be composed of
three members who shall be appointed by the President to serve
at his pleasure, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate. The President shall designate one of the members of the
Council to serve as Chairman. Each member shall be a person
who, as a result of his training, experience, and attainments, is
exceptionally well qualified to analyze and interpret environ-
mental trends and information of all kinds; to appraise pro-
grams and activities of the Federal Government in the light of
the policy set forth in title I of this Act; to be conscious of and
responsive to the scientific, economic, social, esthetic, and
cultural needs and interests of the Nation:' and to formulate and
recommend national policies to promote the improvement of the
quality of the environment.
Sec. 203. (§4343) (a) The Council may employ such
officers and employees as may be necessary to cany out its
functions under this Act. In addition, the Council may employ
and fix the compensation of such experts and consultants as
may be necessary for the carrying out of its functions under this
Act, in accordance with section 3109 of title 5. United States
Code (but without regard to the last sentence thereof).
B-7
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FAOLITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
(b) Notwithstanding section 3679(b) of the Revised Stat-
utea (31 U.S.C. 665(b)), the Council may accept and employ
voluntary and uncompenaated services in furtherance of the
purposes of the Council
Sec. 204. (§4344) It shall be the duty and function of the
Council
(1) to assist and advise the President in the prepara-
. turn of the Environmental Quality Report required by
section 201;
(2) to gather timely and authoritative information
concerning the conditions and trends in the quality of the
environment both current and prospective, to analyze and
interpret such information for ^** purpose
whether such conditions and trends are interfering, or are
likely to interfere, with the achievement of the policy set .
forth in title I of this Act, and to compile and submit to the
President studies relating to such conditions apd trends,
(3) to review and appraise the various programs and
activities of the Federal Government in the light of the
policy set forth in title I of this Act for the purpose of
determining the extent to which such programs and
activities are contributing to the achievement of such
policy, and to make recommendations to the President with
respect thereto;
(4) to develop and *f*o""»f*"* to the President
national policies to foster and promote the improvement of
environmental quality to meet the conservation, social,
health, and other requirements and goals of the
Nation;
(5) to conduct investigations, studies, surveys, re-
search, and analyses relating to jecologicai systems and
environmental quality;
(6) to document and define changes in tho natural
environment, including the plant and «""»! systems, and
to accumulate necessary data tt"1^ other information for a
continuing analysis of these changes or trends and an
interpretation of their underlying causes;
(7) to report at least once each year to the President
on the state and condition of the environment; and
B-8
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
(8) to make and furnish such studies, reports thereon,
and recommendations with respect to matters of policy and
legislation as the President may request.
Sec. 205. (§4345) In exercising its powers, functions, and
duties under this Act, the Council shall
(1) consult with the Citizens' Advisory Committee on
Environmental Quality established by Executive Order
numbered 11472, dated May 29, 1969, and with such
representatives of science, industry, agriculture, labor,
conservation organizations. State and local governments,
sad other groups, as it deems advisable; and
(2) utilize, to the fulktt extent possible, Che services,
facilities, and information (including statistical informa-
tion) of public and private agencies and organizations, and
individuals, in order that duplication of effort and expense
may be avoided, thus assuring that the Council's activities
will not unnecessarily overlap or conflict with similar
activities authorized by law and performed by established
Sec. 206, (§4346) Members of the Council shall serve full
time and the Chairman of the Council «ha|l be compensated at
die rate provided for Level n of the Executive Schedule Pay
Rates (5 USC 5313). The other members of the Council shall be
compensated at the rate provided for Level IV of the Executive
Schedule Fay Rates (5 USC 5315).
Sec. 207. (§4346a) The Council may accept reimbursements
from any private nonprofit organization or from any depart*
meat, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government,
any State, or local government, for the reasonable travel
expenses incurred by an officer or employee of the Council in
connection with his attendance at any conference, seminar, or
similar meeting conducted for the benefit of the Council.
See. 208. (§4346b) The Council may make expenditures in
support of its international activities, including expenditures
for (1) international travel; (2) activities in implementation of
international agreements; and (3) the support of international
exchange programs in the United States and in foreign coun-
tries.
Sec. 209. (§4347) There ere authorized to be appropriated
to carry out the provisions of this Act not to exceed $300,000 foe
fiscal year 1970, $700,000 for fiscal year 1971, and $1,000.000 for
each fiscal year thereafter.
B-9
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX C
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
REGULATIONS FOR IMPI .P-MBNTTNG THE PROCEDURAL
PROVISIONS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
(40 CODE OF REGULATIONS PARTS 1500-1508)
C-l
-------
FAIT ISM-PURPOSE, POUCY. AND
MANDAH
Sec.
15001 PunMK.
1500.1 Policy.
1500.1 Mandate.
1500.4 Reducing paperwork.
1500.5 Reducing delay.
1500.6 Agency authority.
AirrHoairr NEPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1070. as
amended (41 U 8.C. 4371 el M«.I. lee. 100 of
the Clean Air Act. aa amended (41 U.8.C.-
7000) and E.O. 11114. Mar 5. 1070. as
amended by E.0.1IWI. May 14. IPllt.
Bounce 41 PR 59000. Nov. 10. 1011. unless
otherwise noted.
91900.1 Purpose.
(a) The National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) Is our basic nation-
al charter for protection of the envi-
ronment. It establishes policy, seta
goals (section 101). and provides
means (section 102) for carrying out
the policy. Section 102(2) contains
"action-forcing" provisions to make
sure that federal agencies act accord-
Ing to the letter and spirit of the Act.
The regulations that follow Implement
section 102(2). Their purpose Is to tell
federal agencies what they must do to
comply with the procedures and
achieve ,lhe goals of the Act. The
President, the federal agencies, and
the courts share responsibility for en-
forcing the Act so as to achieve the
substantive requirements of section
101.
(b) NEPA procedures must Insure
that environmental Information Is
available to public officials and citi-
zens before decisions are made and
before actions are taken. The Informa-
tion must be of high quality. Accurate
scientific analysis, expert agency com-
ments, and public scrutiny are essen-
tial to Implementing NEPA. Moat Im-
portant. NEPA documents must con-
centrate on the Issues that are truly
significant to the action In question.
rather than amassing needless detail.
(O Ultimately, of course. It Is not
better documents but better decisions
that count. NEPA's purpose Is not to
generate paperworkeven excellent
paperworkbut to foster excellent
action. The NEPA process Is Intended
to help public officials make decisions
(hat are based on understanding of en-
vironmental consequences, and take
actions that protect, restore, and en-
hance the environment. These regula-
tions provide the direction to achieve
this purpose.
116004 Policy.
Federal agencies shall to the fullest
extent possible:
(a) Interpret and administer the
policies, regulations, and public laws
of the United Stales In accordance
with the policies set forth In the Act
and In these regulations.
(b) Implement procedures to make
the NEPA process more useful to deel-
slonmakers and the public: to reduce
paperwork and the accumulation of
extraneous background data: and to
emphasize real environmental Issues
and alternatives. Environmental
Impact statements shall be concise.
clear, and to the point, and shall be
supported by evidence that agencies
have made the necessary environmen-
tal analyses.
(e> Integrate the requirements of
NEPA with other planning and envi-
ronmental review procedures required
by law or by agency practice so that
all such procedures run concurrently
rather than consecutively.
(d) Encourage and facilitate public
Involvement In decisions which affect
the quality of the human environ-
ment.
(el Use the NEPA process to Identify
and assess the reasonable alternatives
to proposed actions that will avoid or
minimize advene effects of these ac-
tions upon the quality of the human
environment.
(f) Use all practicable means, con-
sistent with the requirements of the
Act and other essential considerations
of national policy, to restore and en-
hance the quality of the human envl-
.ronment and avoid or minimize any
possible adverse effects of their ac-
tions upon the quality of the human
environment.
Parts 1900 through IS08 of this title
provide^ regulations applicable to and
binding on all Federal agencies for Im
plementlng the procedural prousions
of the National Environmental Policy
Act of I960, as amended (Pub. L. 91-
190. 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA or
the Act) except where compliance
would be Inconsistent with other stat-
utory requirements. These regulations
are Issued pursuant to NEPA. the En-
vironmental Quality Improvement Act
of 1010. as amended (42 U.8.C. 4371 et
seq.) section 309 of the Clean Air Act.
as amended (42 U S.C. 7609) and Exec-
utive Order 11914. Protection and En-
hancement of Environmental Quality
(March 9. 1970. as amended by Execu-
tive Order 11991. May 24. 1977). These
regulations, unlike the predecessor
guidelines, are not confined to sec.
102(2)(C) (environmental Impact state-
ments). The regulations apply to the
whole of section 102(2). The provisions
of the Act and of these regulations
must be read together as a whole In
order to comply with the spirit and
letter of the law. It Is the Council's In-
tention that Judicial review of agency
compliance with these regulations not
occur before an agency has filed the
final environmental Impact statement.
or has made a final finding of no sig-
nificant Impact (when such a finding
will result In action affecting the envi-
ronment), or takes action that will
result In Irreparable Injury. Further-
more. It Is the Council's Intention that
any trivial violation ol these regula-
tions not give rise to any Independent
cause of >actlon.
DISOO.I Redurln* paperwork.
Agencies shall reduce excessive pa-
perwork by:
(a) Reducing the length of environ-
mental Impact statements
(| tS02.2(c)>. by means such as setting
appropriate page limits
< || 1901.7(b>( Hand 1502.7).
(b) Preparing analytic rather than
encyclopedic environmental Impact
statements (I I902.2(a».
(c) Discussing only briefly Issues
other than significant ones
(I lS02.2(b».
(d> Writing environmental Impact
statements In plain language
(| 1902.8).
(e) Following a clear format for envi-
ronmental Impact statements
If 1502.10).
if) Emphasizing the portions of the
environmental Impact statement that
are useful to declslonmakers and the
public (|| 1902.14 and 1502.19) and re-
.duclnn emphasis on background mate-
rial l| 1502.16).
ig> Using the scoping process, not
only to Identify significant environ-
mental Issues deserving of study, but
also to deemphasbte Insignificant
Issues, narrowing the scope of the en-
vironmental Impact statement process
accordingly (11501.7).
(hi Summarizing the environmental
Impact statement (11502.12) and cir-
culating the summary Instead of the-
entire environmental Impact state-
ment If the latter Is unusually long
111502.19)
il) Using program, policy, or plan en-
vironmental Impact statements and
tiering from statements of broad scope
to those of narrower scope, to elimi-
nate repetitive discussions of the same
Issues (|| 1502.4 and 1502.20)
(J) Incorporating by reference
(11502.21).
(k) Integrating NEPA requirements
ullh other environmental review and
consultation requirements (| 1502.25).
(I) Requiring comments to be as spe-
cif Ic as possible (11503.3).
(m) Attaching and circulating only
changes to the draft environmental
Impact statement, rather than rewrit-
ing and circulating -the entire state-
ment when changes are minor
(11503.4(0).
(n) Eliminating duplication with
Stale and local procedures, by provid-
ing for Joint preparation (11506.2).
and with other Federal procedures, by
providing that an agency may adopt
appropriate environmental documents
prepared by another agency (| 1506.3).
(o> Combining environmental docu-
ments with other documents
(11506.4).
(p) Using categorical exclusions to
define categories of actions which do
not Individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human envi-
ronment and which are therefore
exempt from requirements to prepare
an environmental Impact statement
(| 1508.4).
Using a finding of no significant
Impact when an action not otherwise
excluded will not have a significant
-------
9
U)
effect on the human environment and
Is therefore exempt from require-
ment* to prepare an environmental
Impact statement (| 1308.13).
141 PR 539(0. No* It. 1*78: 44 FR 173. Jin
3.191*1
IIMU Reducing dehr.
Agencies shall reduce delay by:
(a) Integrating the NEPA process
Into early planning i| 1601.2).
(b) Emphasizing Interagency coop-
eration before the environmental
Impact statement Is prepared, rather
than submission of adversary com-
ments on a completed document
(11S01.6).
Establishing appropriate time
limits for the environmental Impact
statement process (|| lM!.7(bX2> and
1501.8).
(f) Preparing environmental Impact
statements early In the process
Using accelerated procedures for
proposals for legislation (11506.8).
(k) Using' categorical exclusions to
define categories of actions which do
not Individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human envi-
ronment (11508.4) and which are
therefore exempt from requirements
to prepare an environmental Impact
statement.
(I) Using a finding of no significant
Impact when an action not otherwise
excluded will not have a significant
effect on the human environment
111508.13) and Is therefore exempt
from requirements to prepare an envi-
ronmental Impact statement.
11500.8 Agency autbarlty.
Each agency shall Interpret the pro-.
visions of the Act as a supplement to
Its existing authority and as a man-
date to view traditional policies and
missions In the light of the Act's na-
tional environmental objectives. Agen-
cies shall review their policies, proce-
dures, and regulations accordingly and
revise them as necessary to Insure full
compliance wlttrthe purposes and pro-
visions of the Act The phrase "to the
fullest extent possible" In section 102
means that each agency of the Federal
Government shall comply with that
section unless existing law applicable
to the agency's operations expressly
prohibits or makes compliance Impos-
sible.
FAIT 1301NIPA AND AOINCY
Apply NEPA early In Ihe proem.
When to prepare an environmental
Nunem.
Whether lo prepare in envlronmen-
Impact statement.
Lead Menelei.
Cooperating agenda.
Time limits.
Sec.
ISOI.I
I SOI 3
1501.3
an
13014
III
IS01S
15018
1501.7
1501.8
AUTMOSITV: NEPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act or 1(10. as
mended 143 VAC. 4371 *« M»I. sec. 30* or
Ihe Clean Air Act as mended (43 D8.C.
7(0*. and E.O. 11814 (Mir. 3. 191*. u
mended by E.0.11991. May 34.1(17)
Sooacc 43 FR (59(3. Nov. 39.1978. unlea
otherwise noted.
8 ISOI.I Puraoee.
The purpose* of this part Include:
(a) Integrating the NEPA process
Into early planning to Insure appropri-
ate consideration of NEPA's policies
and to eliminate delay.
(b> Emphasizing cooperative consul-
tation among agencies before Ihe envi-
ronmental Impact statement Is pre-
pared rather than submission of ad-
versary comments on completed doc-
ument
ic) Providing for ihe swift and fair
resolution of lead agency disputes.
(d) Identifying at an early stage the
significant environmental Issues de-
serving of study and deemphaslzlng In-
significant Issues, narrowing the scope
of the environmental Impact state-
ment accordingly.
Providing a mechanism for put-
ting appropriate time limits on the en-
vironmental Impact statement process.
61501J Apply NEPA early In Ihe preen.
Agencies shall Integrate the NEPA
process with other planning at the
earliest possible time to Insure that
planning and decisions reflect environ-
mental values, to avoid delays later In
the process, and to head off potential
conflicts. Each agency shall:
fa) Comply with the mandate of sec-
tion 102(2KA) to "utilise a systematic.
Interdisciplinary approach which will
Insure the Integrated use of the natu-
ral and social sciences and the environ-
mental design arts In planning and In
declslonmaklng which may have an
Impact on man's environment." as
specified by 11507.2.
(b) Identify environmental effects
and values In adequate detail so they
can be compared to economic and
technical analyses. Environmental
documents and appropriate analyses
shall be circulated and reviewed at the
same time as other planning docu-
ments.
(c) Study, develop, and describe ap-
propriate alternatives to recommended
courses of action In any proposal
which Involves unresolved conflicts
concerning alternative uses of avail-
able resources as provided by section
102(2HE) of the Act.
(d) Provide for esses where actions
are planned by private applicants or
other non-Federal entitles before Fed-
eral Involvement so that:
(II Policies or designated staff are
available to advise potential applicants
of studies or other Information fore-
seeably required for later Federal
action.
(2) The Federal agency consults
early with appropriate State and local
agencies and Indian tribes and with In-
terested private persons and organiza-
tions when Its own Involvement Is rea-
sonably foreseeable.
13) The Federal agency commences
its NEPA process at the earliest possi-
ble lime.
4 1501.3 When lo prepare an environnwn.
lull
(a) Agencies shall prepare an envi-
ronmental assessment (| 1508.0) when
necessary under the procedures adopt-
ed by Individual agencies to supple-
ment these regulations as described In
11507.3. An assessment Is not neces-
sary If the agency has decided to pre-
pare an environmental Impact state-
ment.
(b) Agencies may prepare an envi-
ronmental assessment on any action at
any time In order to assist agency
planning and declslonmaklng.
IISOI.4 Whelher lo prepare in environ-
menial Import lUttnunL
In determining whether to prepare
an environmental Impact statement
the Federal agency shall:
(a> Determine under Its procedures
supplementing these regulations (de-
scribed In I 1507.3) whether the pro-
posal Is one which:
(I) Normally requires an environ-
mental Impact statemenl. or
12) Normally does nol require either
an environmental Impact statement or
an environmental assessment (categor-
ical exclusion).
(b) If the proposed action Is not cov-
ered by paragraph (a) of this section.
prepare an environmental assessment
(| 1508.0). The agency shall Involve en-
vironmental agencies, applicants, and
the public, to the extent practicable.
In preparing assessments required by
11508.WaXl>.
(c) Based on the environmental as-
sessment make Its determination
whether to prepare an environmental
Impact statement.
id) Commence the scoping process
(11501.7). If ihe agency will prepare
an environmental Impact statement.
(e) Prepare a finding of no signifi-
cant Impact (| 1508.13). If the agency
determines on Ihe basis of the envi-
ronmental assessment not lo prepare a
statement.
il) The agency shall make the find-
Ing of no significant Impact available
-------
D
to the affected public as specified In
11506.6.
(2) In certain limited circumstances.
which the agency may cover In its pro-
cedures under 11507.3. the agency
shall make the finding of no signifi-
cant Impact available for public review
(Including State and areawlde clear-
inghouses) for 30 days before the
agency makes Its final determination
whether to prepare an environmental
Impact statement and before the
action may begin. The circumstances
are:
(ll The proposed action to. or to close-
ly similar to. one which normally re-
quires the preparation of an environ-
mental Impact statement under the
procedures adopted by the agency pur-
suant to 11307.3. or
(ID The nature of the proposed
action to one without precedent.
atSOI.6 Lead agtudcs.
(a> A lead agency shall supervise the
preparation of an environmental
Impact statement If more than one
Federal agency either:
(1) Proposes or to Involved In the
same action: or
(2) Is Involved In a group of actions
directly related to each other because
of their functional Interdependence or
geographical proximity.
(b) Federal, State, or local agencies.
Including at least one Federal agency.
may act aa Joint lead agencies to pre-
pare an environmental Impact state-
ment (| 1506.2).
(c> If an action falls within the pro-
visions of paragraph (a) of this section
the potential lead agencies shall deter-
mine by letter or memorandum which
agency shall be the lead agency and
which shall be cooperating agencies.
The agencies shall resolve the lead
agency question so as not to cause
delay. If there to disagreement among
the agencies, the following factors
(which an listed In order of descend-
ing Importance) shall determine lead
agency designation:
(I) Magnitude of agency's Involve-
ment.
(2) Project approval/disapproval au-
thority.
(3) Expertise concerning the action's
environmental effects.
14) Duration of agency's Involve-
ment.
(5) Sequence of agency's Involve-
ment.
(d> Any Federal agency, or any State
or local agency or private person sub-
stantially affected by the absence of
lead agency designation, may make a
written request to the potential lead
agencies that a lead agency be desig-
nated.
ie> If Federal agencies are unable to
agree on which agency will be the lead
agency or If the procedure described In
paragraph (c) of this section haa not
resulted within 45 days In a lead
agency designation, any of the agen-
cies or persons concerned may file a
request with the Council asking It to
determine which Federal agency shall
be the lead agency.
A copy of the request shall be trans-
mitted to each potential lead agency.
The request shall consist of:
(1) A precise description of the
nature and extent of the proposed
action.
(2) A detailed statement of why each
potential lead agency should or should
not be the lead agency under the crite-
ria specified In paragraph (c> of this
section.
if) A response may be filed by any
potential lead agency concerned
within 20 days after a request to filed
with the Council. The Council shall
determine as soon as possible but not
later than 20 days after receiving the
request and all responses to II which
Federal agency shall be the lead
agency and which other Federal agen-
cies shall be cooperating agencies.
Ml PR SSM1. No*. M. mi: 44 PR SIS. Jan.
a. imi <
open
ngign
The purpose of this section to to em-
phasize agency cooperation early In
the NEPA process. Upon request of
the lead agency, any other Federal
agency which has Jurisdiction by law
shall be a cooperating agency. In addi-
tion any other Federal agency which
has special expertise with respect to
any environmental Issue, which should
be addressed In the statement may be
a cooperating agency upon request of
the lead agency. An agency may re-
quest the lead agency to designate It a
cooperating agency.
(a) The lead agency shall:
(1) Request the participation of each
cooperating agency In the NEPA proc-
ess at the earliest possible time.
(2) Use the environmental analysis
and proposals of cooperating agencies
with Jurisdiction by law or special ex-
pertise, to the maximum extent possi-
ble consistent with Its responsibility as
lead agency.
(3) Meet with a cooperating agency
at the lauer's request.
(b) Each cooperating agency shall.
(I) Participate In the NEPA process
at the earliest possible time.
(2) Participate In the scoping process
(described below In 11501.7).
(3) Assume on request of the lead
agency responsibility for developing
Information and preparing environ-
mental analyses Including portions of
the environmental Impact statement
concerning which the cooperating
agency has special expertise.
(4) Make available staff support at
I he lead agency's request to enhance
the latter's Interdisciplinary capabil-
ity.
(5) Normally use Its own funds. The
lead agency shall, to the extent avail-
able funds permit, fund those major
activities or analyses It requests from
cooperating agencies. Potential lead
agencies shall Include such funding re-
quirements In their budget requests.
(0 A cooperating agency may In re-
sponse to a lead agency's request for
assistance In preparing the environ-
mental Impact statement (described In
paragraph (b) (3). (4). or (5) of this
section) reply that other program
commitments preclude any Involve-
ment or the degree of Involvement re-
quested In the action that to the sub-
ject of the environmental Impact
statement. A copy of this reply shall
be submitted to the Council.
I ISOI.7
There shall be an early and open
process for determining the scope of
Issues to be addressed and for Identify-
ing the significant Issues related to a
proposed action. This process shall be
termed scoping. As soon as practicable
after Its decision to prepare an envi-
ronmental Impact statement and
before (he scoping process the trail
agency shall publish a notice of Intern
H1508.22) in the FEDERAL REGISTER
except as provided In 11507.3iei
Indicate any public environmen-
tal assessments and other environmen-
tal Impact statements which are being
or will be prepared that are related to
but are not part of the scope of the
Impact statement under consideration.
(6) Identify other environmental
review and consultation requirements
so the lead and cooperating agencies
may prepare other required analyses
and studies concurrently with, and In-
tegrated with, the environmental
Impact statement as provided In
11502.25.
(7) Indicate the relationship between
the timing of the preparation ol envi-
ronmental analyses and the agency's
tentative planning and declslonmaklng
schedule.
(b) As part of the scoping process
the lead agency may:
111 Set page limits on environmental
documents (115027).
-------
n
lisou
11) Set time llmlls < I 1501 B>.
(3) Adopt procedural under (1101 3
la combine Its enuronmenial assess-
ment process with its scoping process.
(4) Hold an early scoping meeting or
meeting* which may bf Integrated
with any other early planning meeting
the agency has. Such a scoping meet-
ing will often be appropriate when the
Impacts of a particular action are con-
fined to specific aim.
(cl An agency shall rrvlse the deter-
minations made under paragraphs
and (b> of this section If substantial
changes are made later in the pro-
posed action, or If significant new cir-
cumstances or Information arise which
bear on the proposal or Its Impacts.
01 MM Tim* Italia.
Although the Council has decided
that prescribed universal time llmlls
for the entire NEPA process are too
Inflexible. Federal agencies are en-
couraged to set lime limits appropriate
to Individual actions (consistent with
the time Intenals rrquired by
I ISM 10). When multiple aitvnrles are
Involved the reference lu awncy or low
means lead agency
la) The agency shall set lime limits
If an applicant for the proposed action
requests them: Provided. That the
limits are consistent with the purposes
of NEPA and other essential consider-
ations of national policy.
The agency may:
ell Consider the following factors In
determining time limits:
(I) Potential for environmental
harm.
Impacts shall be discussed In pro-
portion to their significance. There
shall be only brief discussion of other
than significant Issues. As In a finding
of no significant Impact, there should
be only enough discussion to show
why more study Is not warranted.
10
Environmental Impact state-
ments shall slate how alternatives con-
sidered In It and decisions based on It
will or will not achieve the require-
ments of sections 101 and 10Z( I) of the
Act and other environmental laws and
policies.
are lo.be Included In
every recommendation or report.
On proposals (| IS08.23).
For legislation and (| 1S08.1T).
Other major Federal actions
< 11508.18).
Significantly 411508.27).
Affecting <|l ISOU. 150881
The quality of the human environ-
ment (f 1508.14).
11501.1 Major Federal actions requiring
the preparation of entlromtenlal
(a) Agencies shall make sure the pro-
posal which to the subject of an envi-
ronmental Impact statement Is proper-
ly defined. Agencies shall use the cri-
teria for scope < 11508.19) to determine
which proposal(s) shall be the subject
of a particular statement. Proposals or
parts of proposals which are rrlated to
each other closely enough to be. In
effect, a single course of action shall
-------
2
be evaluated In single Impact state-
ment.
lb) Environmental Impact state-
ments may be prepared, and are some-
times -required, for broad Federal ac-
tions such as th« adoption of new
ateney program* or regulations
<| 150g.ll). Agencies shall prepare
statements on broad actions so thai
they are relevant to policy and are
timed to coincide with meaningful
points In agency planning and ded-
slonmaklng.
icl When preparing statements on
broad actions (Including proposals by
more than one agency), agencies may
(bid It useful to evaluate the
proposal(i) In one of the following
ways:
(1) Geographically. Including actions
occurring In the ssme general location.
such as body of water, region, or met-
ropolitan area.
it) aenerteally. Including actions
which have relevant similarities, such
as common timing. Impacts, alterna-
tives, methods of Implementation.
media, or subject matter.
<3> By stage of technological devel-
opment Including federal or federally
assisted research, development or dem-
onstration programs for new technol-
ogies which. If applied, could signifi-
cantly atlect the quality of the human
environment. Statements shall be pre-
pared on such programs and shall be
available before the program has
reached a stage of Investment or com-
mitment to Implementation likely to
determine subsequent development or
restrict later alternatives.
Id) Agencies shall as appropriate
employ scoping l| 1501.7). tiering
(|1S03.20>. and other methods listed
In II 1M0.4 and IS00.5 to relate broad
and narrow actions and to avoid dupli-
cation and delay.
II50S.5
An agency shall commence prepara-
tion of an environmental Impact state-
ment as close as possible to the time
the agency Is developing or Is present-
ed with a proposal (| 1508.13) so that
preparation can be completed In time
for the final statement to be Included
In any recommendation or report on
the proposal. The statement shall be
prepared early enough so that It can
nerve practically as an Important con-
tribution to the deelslonmaklng proc-
ess and will not be used to rationalize
or Justify decisions already made
HI 1500.2(0. ISOM and IS02.2). For
Instance:
(a) For projects directly undertaken
by Federal agencies the environmental
Impact statement shall be prepared at
the feasibility analysts (go-no go) stage
and may be supplemented at a later
stage If necessary.
(b) For applications to the agency
appropriate environmental assess-
ments or statements ihall be com-
menced no later than Immediately
after the application Is received. Fed-
era! agencies are encouraged to begin
preparation of such assessments or
statements earlier, preferably Jointly'
with applicable State or local agencies.
(O For adjudication, the final envi-
ronmental Impact statement shall nor-
mally precede the final staff recom-
mendation and that portion of the
public hearing related to the Impact
study. In appropriate circumstances
the ststement may follow preliminary
hearings designed to gather Informs-
lion for use In the statements.
id) For Informal rulemaklng the
draft environmental impact statement
shall normally accompany the pro-
posed rule.
HUM IntndhelDlhmiy arepanltM.
Environmental Impact statements
shall be prepared using an Inter-disci-
pllnary approach which will Insure the
Integrated use of the natural and
social sciences and the environmental
design arts (section 10K1XA) of the
Act). The disciplines of the preparers
shall be appropriate to the scope and
Issues Identified In the scoping process
(| 1501.7).
II5M.T Page limits.
The text of final environmental
Impact statements (e.g.. paragraphs
id) through (g) of 11502.10) shall nor.
mally be less than 150 pages and for
proposals of unusual scope or com-
plexity shall normally be less than 300
IIMU Writing.
Environmental Impact statements
shall be written In plain language and
may use appropriate graphics so that
deelslonmakers and the public can
readily understand them. Agencies
should employ writers of clear prose
or editors to write, review, or edit
statements, which will be based upon
the analysis and supporting data from
the natural and social sciences and the
environmental deilgn arts.
II5BU Draft, final, snd upphmmtol
Except for proposals for legislation
as provided In II508J environmental
Impact statements shall be prepared In
two stages and may be supplemented.
(a) Draft environmental Impact
statements shall be prepared In ac-
cordance with the scope decided upon
In the scoping process. The lead
agency shall work with the cooperat-
ing agencies and shall obtain com-
ments as required In Part 1503 ol this
chapter. The'draft statement must
fulfill and satisfy to the fullest extent
possible the requirements established
for final statements In section
102 of the Act. If a draft state-
ment Is so Inadequate as to preclude
meaningful analysis, the agency shall
prepare and circulate a revised draft
of the appropriate portion. The
agency shall make every effort to dis-
close and discuss at appropriate points
In the draft statement all major points
of view on the environmental Impacts
of the alternatives Including the pro-
posed action.
(b) Final environmental Impact
statements shall respond to comments
as required In Part 1503 of this chap-
ter. The agency shall discuss at appro-
priate points in the final statement
any responsible opposing view which
was not adequately discussed In the
draft statement and shall Indicate the
agency's response to the Issues raised.
Agencies:
(1) Shall prepare supplements to
either draft or final environmental
Impact statements If:
(I) The agency makes substantial
changes In the proposed action that
are relevant to environmental con-
cerns: or
ell) There are significant new cir-
cumstances or Information relevant to
environmental concerns and bearing
on the proposed action or Its Impacts.
(1) May also prepare supplements
when the agency determines thst the
purposes of the Act will be furthered
by doing so.
13) Shall adopt procedures for Intro-
ducing a supplement Into Its formal
administrative record. If such a record
exists.
(1) Shall prepare, circulate, and file
a supplement to a.statement In the
same fashion (exclusive of scoping) ss
s draft and final statement unless al-
ternative procedures are approved by
the Council.
II5M.IO RMOiMwadtd formal.
Agencies shall use a formal for envi-
ronmental Impact statements which
will encourage good analysis and clear
presentation of the alternatives In-
cluding the proposed action. The fol-
lowing standard format for environ-
mental Impact statements should be
followed unless the agency determines
that there Is a compelling reason to do
otherwise:
(a) Cover sheet.
lb) Summary.
icl Table of contents.
id) Purpose of and need for action
le) Alternatives Including proposed
action (sections lOlllMCMlin and
IO»2ME)of the Act).
if) Affected environment.
"(g) Environmental consequences (es-
pecially sections lOlllXC) II). (II). (Iv).
and (v> of the Act).
(h) List of preparers.
H> Ust of Agencies. Organization].
and persons to whom copies of the
statement are sent.
U> Index.
ik) Appendices lit any).
If a different format Is used. It shall
Include paragraphs la), lb). le). (h). ID.
and IJ). of this section and shall In-
clude the substance of paragraphs id).
(e>. if), (g). and (k) of this section, as
further described In || I501.lt
through 1502.18. In any appropriate
format.
II
11
-------
2.
OISOt.ll Cover inert.
The cover sheet shall not exceed one
page. It shall Include:
(a) A list ol the responsible agencies
Including the lead agency and any co-
operating agencies.
(b) The title of the proposed action
that Is the subject of the statement
land If appropriate the titles of related
cooperating agency actions), together
with the Stateis) and coumyftesl lor
other Jurisdiction if applicable) where
the action Is located.
(el The name, address, and tele-
phone number of the person at' the
agency who can supply further Infer-
id) A designation of the statement as
a draft, final, or draft or final supple-
ment.
le> A one paragraph abstract of the
statement.
if) The date by which comments
must be received (computed In coop-
eration with EPA under 11506.10).
The Information required by this sec-
tion may be entered on Standard
Form 424 (In Items 4. 6. 7. 10. and IB).
IIS02.lt Suimrarjr.
Each environmental Impact state-
ment shall contain a summary which
adequately and accurately summarizes
the statement. The- summary shall
stress the major conclusions, areas of
controversy I Including Issues raised by
agencies and the public), and the
Issues to be resolved I Including the
choice among alternatives). The sum-
mary will normally not exceed IS
pages.
IIMt.13 Purpose and need.
The statement shall briefly specify
the underlying purpose and need to
which the agency Is responding In pro-
posing the alternatives Including the
proposed action.'
1ISW.II Alternative! Including Ih* pro-
puwd action.
This section Is the heart of the envi-
ronmental Impact statement. Based on
the Information and analysis present-
ed In the sections on the Affected En-
vironment 111502.15) and the Environ-
mental Consequences II 1502.16). It
should present the environmental Im-
pacts of the proposal and the alterna-
tives In comparative form, thus sharp-
ly defining the Issues and providing a
clear bails for choice among options
by the dectslonmaker and the public.
In this section agencies shall:
(a) Rigorously explore and objective-
ly evaluate all reasonable alternatives.
and for alternatives which were elimi-
nated from detailed study, briefly dis-
cuss the reasons for their having been
eliminated.
Devote substantial treatment to
each alternative considered In detail
Including the proposed action so that
reviewers may evaluate their compara-
tive merits.
let Include reasonable alternatives
not within the Jurisdiction of the lead
agency.
id) Include the alternative of no
action.
ie> Identify the agency's preferred
alternative or alternatives. If one or
more exists. In the draft statement
and Identify such alternative In the
final statement unless another law
prohibits the expression of such a
preference.
(f) Include appropriate mitigation
measures not already Included In the
proposed action or alternatives.
ft 1502.11 Affected radnmnwnl.
The environmental Impact state-
ment shall succinctly describe the en-
vironment of the area(s) to be affected
or created by the alternatives under
consideration. The descriptions shall
be no longer than Is necessary to un-
derstand the effects of the alterna-
tives. Data and analyses In a state-
ment shall be commensurate with the
Importance of the Impact, with less
Important material summarized, con-
solidated, or simply referenced. Agen-
cies shall avoid useless bulk In state-
ments and shall concentrate effort
and attention on Important Issues.
Verbose descriptions of the affected
environment are themselves no meas-
ure of the adequacy of an environmen-
tal Impact statement.
«IS02.I6 Knilronmtnul conitqu«WM.
This section forms the scientific and
analytic basis for the comparisons
under 11502.14. It shall consolidate
11
the discussions of those elements re-
quired by sections I02I2NC) (I), ill).
Hv). and (v) of NEPA which are within
the scope of the statement and as
much of section IOX2NCMIII) as Is nec-
essary to support the comparisons.
The discussion will Include the envi-
ronmental Impacts of the alternatives
Including the proposed action, any ad-
verse environmental effects which
cannot be avoided should the proposal
be Implemented, the relationship be-
tween short-term uses of man's envi-
ronment and the maintenance and en-
hancement of long-term productivity.
and any Irreversible or Irretrievable
commitments of resources which
would be Involved In the proposal
should II be Implemented. This section
should not duplicate discussions In
11502.14. It shall Include discussions
of:
ia> Direct effects and their signifi-
cance (| 1508.6).
(b) Indirect effects and their signifi-
cance! 115068).
(c) Possible conflicts between the
proposed action and the objectives of
Federal, regional. State, and local (and
In the case of a reservation. Indian
tribe) land use plans, policies and con-
trols for the area concerned. (See
I I506.2id).)
id) The environmental effects of al-
ternatives Including the proposed
action. The comparisons under
11502.14 will be based on this discus-
(e) Energy requirements and conser-
vation potential of various alternatives
(f > Natural or depletable resource re-
quirements and conservation potential
of various alternatives and mitigation
(g> Urban quality, historic and cul-
tural resources, and the design of the
built environment. Including the reuse
and conservation potential of various
alternatives and mitigation measures.
(h) Means to mitigate adverse envi-
ronmental Impacts (If not fully cov-
ered under 11602.!4lf».
141 PR UM4. Nov. M. 1(78. 44 PR 871. Jan.
1.187(1
IIS02.I7 IJH of preparm.
The " environmental Impact state-
ment shall list the names, together
14
uith their qualifications (expertise.
experience, professional disciplines).
of the persons who were primarily re-
sponsible for preparing the environ-
mental Impact statement or significant
background papers. Including basic
components of the statement
III 1502.6 and 1502.8). Where possible
the persons who are responsible for a
particular analysis. Including analyses
In background papers, shall be Identi-
fied. Normally the list will not exceed
two pages.
IISOt.18 Appendix.
If an agency prepares an appendix
lo an environmental Impact statement
the appendix shall:
(a) Consist of material prepared In'
connection with an environmental
Impact statement (as distinct from ma-
terial which Is not so prepared and
which Is Incorporated by reference
111502.21)).
(b) Normally consist of material
which substantiates any analysis fun-
damental to the Impact statement:
ic> Normally be analytic and rele-
innl to the decision to be made.
td) Be circulated with the environ-
mental Impact statement or be readily
available on request.
I ISOM9 Circulation of the «i>ironmrmil
Agencies shall circulate the entire
draft and final environmental Impact
statements except for certain appendi-
ces as provided In 1 1502.18(d) and un-
changed statements as provided In
1 1503.4(0. However. If the statement
Is unusually long, the agency may cir-
culate the summary Instead, except
that the entire statement shall be fur-
nished to:
Any Federal agency »hlch has
Jurisdiction by law or special expertise
with respect to any environmental
Impact Involved and any appropriate
Federal. State or local agency author-
ized to develop and enforce environ-
mental standards.
(b) The applicant. If any.
10 Any person, organization, or
agency requesting the entire environ-
mental Impact statement.
id) In the case of a final environ-
mental Impact statement any person.
-------
n
oo
organisation, or agency which submit-
ted substantive comments on the
draft.
II the stency circulates the summary
and thereafter receives a timely re-
quest lor the entire statement and for
additional time to comment, the time
for that requestor only shall be ex-
tended by at leaat IS days beyond the
minimum period.
IIMMS. TUrini.
Agencies are eneouraied to tier their
environmental Impact statements to
eliminate repetitive discussions of the
same Issues and to focus on the actual
Issues ripe for decision at each level of
environmental review (| IMB.3BJ.
Whenever a broad . environmental
Impact statement has been prepared
(such as a program or policy state-
ment) and a subsequent statement or
environmental assessment Is then pre-
pared on an action Included within the
entire program or policy (such as a
site specific action) the subsequent
statement or environmental assess-
ment need only summarize the Issues
discussed In the broader statement
and Incorporate discussions from the
broader statement by reference and
shall concentrate on the Issues specific
to the subsequent action. The subse-
quent document shall state where the
earlier document Is available. Tiering
may also be appropriate for different
stages of actions. (Section 1508.28).
IUz.il Ineoreonltaii by nfereMC.
Agencies shall Incorporate material
Into an environmental Impact state-
ment by reference when the effect will
be to cut down on bulk without Imped-
ing agency and public review of the
action. The Incorporated material
shall be died In the statement and Its
content briefly described. No material
may be Incorporated by reference
unless It Is reasonably available for In-
spection by potentially Interested per-
sons within the lime allowed for com-
ment. Material based on proprietary
data which Is liself not available for
review and comment shall not be In-
corporated by reference.
« 1501.11 Incomplete or unanaltsble Infor-
When an agency Is evaluating rea-
sonably foreseeable significant adverse
v I feels on the human environment In
an environmental Impact statement
and there Is Incomplete or unavailable
Information, the agency shall always
make clear that such Information Is
lacking.
(a) If the Incomplete Information
relevant to reasonably foreseeable sig-
nificant advene Impacts to essential to
a reasoned choice among alternatives
and the overall costs of obtaining It
are net exorbitant, the agency shall
Include the Information In the envi-
ronmental Impact statement.
(bt If the Information relevant to
reasonably foreseeable significant ad-
verse Impact* cannot be obtained be-
cause the overall costs of obtaining It
are exorbitant or the means to obtain
It are not known, the agency shall In-
clude within the environmental
Impact statement: (I) A statement
that such Information Is Incomplete or
unavailable; (II a statement of the rel-
evance of the Incomplete or unavail-
able Information to evaluating reason-
ably foreseeable significant advene
Impacts on the human environment:
13) a summary of existing credible sci-
entific evidence which Is relevant to
evaluating the reasonably foreseeable
significant advene Impacts on the
human environment, and mine agen-
cy's evaluation of such Impacts based
upon theoretical approaches or re-
search methods generally accepted In
the scientific community. For the pur-
poses of this section, "reasonably fore-
seeable" Includes Impacts which have
catastrophic consequences, even If
ttielr probability of occurrence Is low.
provided that the analysis of the Im-
pacts to supported by credible scientif-
ic evidence. Is not based on pure con-
jecture, and b within the rule of
reason.
icl The amended regulation will be
applicable to all environmental Impact
statements for which a Notice of
Intent 110 CPU ISOB.27) Is published
in the FCDCML RHISTHI on or after
May 27. IMS. For environmental
Impact statements In progress, agen-
cies may choose to comply with the re-
quirements of either the original or
amended regulation.
IUPRlMn.Apr.u.iiHI
IIHJ.O CotMKMflt (Minis.
If a eon-benefit analysis relevant to
the choice among environmentally dif-
ferent alternatives to being considered
(or the proposed action. It shall be In-
corporated by reference or appended
to the statement as an aid In evaluat-
ing the environmental consequences.
To assess the adequacy of compliance
with section 10K3MB) of the Act the
statement shall, whtn a cost-benefit
analysts to prepared, discuss the rels-
tlonshlp between that analysis and
any analyses of unqualified environ-
mental Impact*, values, and amenities.
For purposes of complying with the
Act. the weighing of the merits and
drawbacks of the various alternatives
need not be displayed In a monetary
cost-benefit analysis sad should not be
when there are Important qualitative
considerations, la any event, an envi-
ronmental Impact statement should at
least Indicate those considerations. In-
cluding factors not related to environ-
mental quality, which are likely to be
relevant and Important to a decision.
IIHtM MeUmdslogyandsdtiiUHcac*»-
i shall Insure the profession-
al Integrity, including scientific Integ-
rity, of the discussions and analyses In
envtronmental Impact statement*.
They shall Identify any methodologies
need and shall make espllctt reference
by footnote to the seteatlfle and other
mines relied upon for conclusions In
sutement. An agency may place
' of methodology h an ap-
(a) To the fullest extent possible.
i shall prepare draft envlron-
ttalenema concurrent-
ly with and Integrated with environ-
mental Impact analyses and related
surreys and studies required by the
run tad Wildlife Coordination Act t U
U AC. Ml et seq.1. the National His-
toric Preservation Act of 1966 (U
OAC. 410 et seq.). the Endangered
Species Act of IVn (IS U.8.C. 1531 et
seq.). and other environmental review
laws and executive orders.
(b) The draft environmental Impact
statement shall list all Federal per-
mits, licenses, and other entitlements
which must be obtained in Implement-
ing the proposal. If It to uncertain
whether a Federal permit, license, or
other entitlement to necessary, the
draft environmental Impact statement
shall so Indicate.
I5M-COMMIMTTNO
Sec.
IMJ.I nirtUiur comments.
im.a Dutvloonamit.
19*1.1 Bpedfleur of comiaenu.
AUIIIUSIII. mPA. the Bntranmenuu
Quality Inummnest, Act ol mo. u
amended 111 OJB.C. 4»l el M»>. sec. M* of
the Clean Air Act. ss smendid (41 U SC.
MM), and tO. lllli (Uu. 6. 1*10. a.
mended br LO. I1W1. Hay M. Itm
Somes: 41 PR tun. Nov. M. l«s. unless
HUM
(a) After preparing a draft environ-
mental Impact sutement and before
Eeparing a- final environmental
pact sutement the agency shall:
U) Obtain the comments of any Fed-
eral agency which ha* Jurisdiction by
law or special expertise with respect to
any environmental Impact Involved or
which to authorized to develop and en-
force environmental standards.
(» Request the comments of:
(I) Appropriate Bute and local agen-
cies which are authorised to develop
and enforce environmental standards;
(III Indian tribes, when'the effects
may be on a reservation: and
(HI) Any agency which has requested
that It receive sutements on action* of
the kind proposed.
Under Executive Order No. I237J. the
Office of Management and Budget.
through it* system of clearinghouse*.
provides means of securing the view*
of Stale and local environmental agen-
cies. The clMringhotue* may be used.
by mutual agreement of the lead agency
nd the clearinghouse, for securing
is
-------
State and local reviews of the draft en-
vironmental Impact statement*.
13) Request comments from the ap-
plicant. If any.
(4) Request comments from the
public, affirmatively sollcltlni corn-
menu from those persona or organisa-
tions who may be Interested or affect-
ed.
(b> An agency may request com-
ments on a final environmental Impact
statement before the decision Is finally
made. In any case other agencies or
persons may make comments before
the final decision unless a different
time Is provided under 11506.10.
IIM3.I Duly lo comment.
Federal agencies with Jurisdiction by
lav or special expertise with respect to
any environmental Impact Involved
and agencies which are authorized to
develop and enforce environmental
standards shall comment on state-
ments within their jurisdiction, exper-
tise, or authority. Agencies shall com-
ment within the time period specified
for comment In 11506.10. A Federal
agency may reply that It has no com-
ment. If a cooperating agency Is satis-
fied that Its views are adequately re-
flected In the environmental Impact
statement. It should reply that It has
no comment*
0I5UJ Specificity of commenti.
(a) Comments on an environmental
Impact statement or on a proposed
action shall be as specific as possible
and may address either the adequacy
of the statement or the merits of the
alternatives discussed or both.
fb> When a commenting agency criti-
cises a lead agency's predictive meth-
odology, the commenting agency
should describe the alternative meth-
odology which It prefers and why.
le) A cooperating agency shall speci-
fy In Its comments whether It needs
additional Information to fulfill other
applicable environmental reviews or
consultation requirements and what
Information It needs. In particular. It
shall specify any additional Informa-
tion It needs to comment adequately
on the draft statement's analysis of
significant site-specific effects associ-
ated with the granting or approving
by that cooperating agency of neces-
sary Federal permits, licenses, or enti-
tlements.
id) When a cooperating agency with
Jurisdiction by law objects to or ex-
presses reservations about the propos-
al on grounds of environmental Im-
pacts, the agency expressing the objec-
tion or reservation shall specify the
mitigation measures It considers neces-
sary to allow the agency to grant or
approve applicable permit, license, or
related requirements or concurrences.
1503.1 Reipofiae lo comrnmU.
An agency preparing a final envi-
ronmental Impact statement shall
assess and consider comments both In-
dlvldually and collectively, and shall
respond by one or more of the means
listed below, stating Its response In the
final statement. Possible responses are
to:
ID Modify alternatives Including the
proposed action.
ID Develop and evaluate alterna-
tives not previously given serious con-
sideration by the agency.
13) Supplement. Improve, or modify
Its analyses.
14) Make factual corrections.
IS) Explain why the comments do
not warrant further agency response.
citing the sources, authorities, or rea-
sons which support the agency's posi-
tion and. If appropriate. Indicate those
circumstances which would trigger
agency reappraisal or further re-
sponse.
ib) All substantive comments re-
ceived on the draft statement lor sum-
maries thereof where the response has
been exceptionally voluminous).
should be attached to the final state-
ment whether or not the comment Is
thought to merit Individual discussion
by the agency In the text of the state-
a new cover sheet shall be filed as the
final statement II 1506.0).
PART 1504- niOiaSION MFIR.
OUMal W M0-
ACTIONS DIT1I-
le) If changes In response to com-
ments are minor and are confined to
the responses described In paragraphs
14) and IS) of this section, agencies
may write them on errata sheets and
attach them to the statement Instead
of rewriting the draft statement. In
such cases only the comments, the re-
sponses, and the changes and not the
final statement need be circulated
111502.10). The entire document with
If
Sec.
1*04.1 Purpose.
JgJ-J Criteria for referral.
W04.1 Procedure lor retonli ud re-
AmoaiTT: NCPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1910. as
amended 141VJSC. 4111 tt *,.). MC. JM of
the Clean Air Act. at amended 142 U8.C.
1MI). and EO IISI4 (Mar. s. 1910. aa
amended by HO. 11991. May 14.1911)
Soros: 43 PR SUM. Nov. M. I91S. unleai
olhenrlae noted.
IISM.I ParpoM.
la) This pan establishes procedures
for referring to the Council Federal
Interageney disagreements concerning
proposed major Federal actions that
might cause unsatisfactory environ-
mental effects. It provides means for
early resolution of such disagree-
ments.
lb> Under section 300 of the Clean
Air Act 142 O.8.C. T600I. the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency Is directed to review and
comment publicly on the environmen-
tal Impacts of Federal activities. In-
cluding actions for which environmen-
tal Impact statements an prepared. If
after this review the Administrator de-
termines that the matter Is "unsatis-
factory from the standpoint of public
health or welfare or environmental
quality." section 300 directs that the
matter be referred lo the Council
thereafter "environmental referrals").
lc> Under section 102I2MC) of the
Act other Federal agencies may make
similar reviews of environmental
Impact statements. Including Judg-
ments on the acceptability of antici-
pated environmental Impacts. These
reviews must be made available to the
President, the Council and the public.
OIS04.I Criteria for referral.
Environmental referrals should be
made to the Council only after con-
Is
certed. timely las early as possible In
the process), but unsuccessful at-
tempts to resolve differences with the
lead agency. In determining what envi-
ronmental objections to the matter
are appropriate to refer to the Coun-
cil, an agency should weigh potential
adverse environmental Impacts, con-
sidering:
ia> Possible violation of national en-
vironmental standards or policies.
lb) Severity.
lc> Geographical scope.
id) Duration.
ie> Importance as precedents.
if) Availability of environmentally
preferable alternatives.
OIS04.1 Procedure for referral! and re-
la) A Federal agency making the re-
ferral to the Council shall:
ill Advise the lead agency at the
earliest possible time that It Intends lo
refer a matter to the Council unless a
satisfactory agreement Is reached.
12) Include such advice In the refer-
ring agency's comments on the draft
environmental Impact statement.
except when the statement does not
contain adequate Information to
permit an assessment of the matter's
environmental acceptability.
13) Identify any essential Informa-
tion that Is lacking and request that It
be made available at the earliest possi-
ble lime.
(4) Send copies of such advice to the
Council.
(b) The referring agency shall deliv-
er Its referral to the Council not later
than twenty-five I2S> days sfter the
final environmental Impact statement
has been made available to the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, com-
menting agencies, and the public.
Except when an extension of this
period has been granted by the lead
agency, the Council will not accept a
referral after that date.
ic) The referral shall consist of:
IDA copy of the letter signed by the
head of the referring agency and dellv-
ered to the lead agency Informing the
lead agency of the referral and the
reasons for It. and requesting that no
action be taken to Implement the
matter until the Council acts upon the
-------
referral. The letter shall Include a
copy of the statement referred to In
(ci(2) of this section.
l» A statement supported by factual
evidence leading to the conclusion
that the matter Is unsatisfactory from
the standpoint of public health or wel-
fare or environmental quality. The
statement shall:
Contain a finding by the agency
whether the Issue raised Is of national
Importance because of the threat to
national environmental resources or
policies or for some other reason.
Address fully the Issues raised In
the referral.
(9) Be supported by evidence.
(3) Olve the lead agency's response
lo the referring agency's recommenda-
tions.
«e) Interested persons (Including the
applicant) may deliver their views In
writing to the Council. Views In sup-
port of the referral should be deliv-
ered not later than the referral. Views
In support of the response shall be de-
livered not later than the response.
(I) Not later than twenty-five (25)
days after receipt of both the referral
and any response or upon being In-
formed (hat there will be no response
(unless the lead agency agrees to a
longer time), the Council may lake
one or more of the following actions:
(1) Conclude that the process of re-
ferral and response has successfully
resolved the problem.
(2) Initiate discussions with the
agencies with the objective of media-
tion with referring and lead agencies.
(3) Hold public meetings or hearings
to obtain additional views and Infor-
(4) Determine thai the Issue Is not
one of national Importance and re-
quest the referring and lead agencies
to pursue their decision process.
(5) Determine thai the Issue should
be further negotiated by the referring
and lead agencies and Is not appropri-
ate for Council consideration until one
or more heads of agencies report to
the Council that the agencies' dto-
ftiTccmcnta* we li i ccond table.
(6) Publish Its findings and reeom-
RwndAtloiu (InclwHuB where ftppropri*
ate a finding that the submitted evl-
dence does not support the position of
an agency ).
1 7) When appropriate, submit the re-
ferral and the response together with
the Council's recommendation to the
President for action.
(g) The Council shall take no longer
than M days to complete the actions
specified In paragraph if) (2). 13). or
(5) of this section.
(h) When the referral Involves an
action required by statute lo be deter-
mined on the record after opportunity
for agency hearing, the referral shall
be conducted In manner consistent
with S VAC. I91(d) (Administrative
Procedure Act).
(11 PR SUM. Nov. M. MTI: «4 PR gll. Jan.
PAN 1S05 NIPA AND AOCNCY
DICUIOMMAKINO
See.
ISOft.1 Asener decUonin
1S05.1 Record of decision In eon nquttlns
envnonimnul Impact nucmenu.
IUS.1 Implementing the decision.
Aomoairr: NEPA. Hie environmental
Quality Improvement Act ol 1170. at
amended Ml O.S.C. 4111 tl mo. I. see. lot at
the Clean Air Act. as amended (41 U.SC
I*
tami. MM to mil IMV s. mo. M
amended by EO. IIMI. MM 1«. IM1>
SomcK «1 PR HSM. No* M. IMS. unleM
otherwise noted.
IIHS.I
duna,
prare-
Agendes shall adopt procedures
(| 1401.3) to ensure that decisions are
made in accordance with the policies
and purposes of the Act. Such proce-
dures shall Include but not be limited
UK
(a) Implementing procedures under
section 102(2) to achieve the require-
ments of sections 101 and 10X11.
(b) Designating the major decision
points for the agency's principal pro-
grams likely to have a significant
effect on the human environment and
assuring that the NEPA process corre-
sponds with them.
(el Requiring that relevant environ-
mental documents, comments, and re-
sponses be part of the record hi formal
rulemsklng or adjudkatory proceed-
(d> Requiring that relevant environ-
mental documents, comments, and re-
sponses accompany the proposal
through existing agency review proc-
esses so that agency officials use the
statement In making decisions.
(e> Requiring that the alternatives
considered by the declslonmaker are
encompassed by the range of alterna-
tives discussed In the relevant environ-
mental documents and that the decl-
slonmaker consider the alternatives
described In the environmental Impact
statement. If another decision docu-
ment accompanies the relevant envi-
ronmental documents to the decision-
maker, agencies are encouraged to
make available lo the public before
the decision Is made any part of that
document that relates to the compari-
son of alternatives.
I IW.1 Record of iecliloii In cam re-
quiring cnrtronmenial Impact iiau-
At the time ol Its decision c| ISMIOJ
or. If appropriate. Its recommendation
to Congress, each agency shall prepare
a concise public record ol decision.
The record, which may be Integrated
Into any other record prepared by (he
agency, shall:
(a) State what the decision wss.
(b) Identify all alternatives consid-
ered by the agency In reaching Its de-
cision, specifying the alternative or al-
ternatives which were considered lo be
environmentally preferable. An
agency may discuss preferences among
alternatives based on relevant factors
Including economic and technical con-
siderations and agency statutory mis-
sions. An agency shall Identify and dis-
cuss all such factors Including any es-
sential considerations ol national
policy which were balanced by the
agency In making Its decision and
state how those considerations entered
Into lla decision.
(c) Slate whether all practicable
means to avoid or minimize environ-
mental harm from the alternative se-
lected have been adopted, and If not.
why they were not. A monitoring and
enforcement program shall be adopted
and summarized where applicable for
any mitigation.
I ISOS.1 Implementing the declilon.
Agencies may provide for monitoring
to assure that their decisions are car-
ried out and should 40 so In Important
cases. Mitigation (| I606.2(c» and
other conditions established In the en-
vironmental Impact statement or
during lla review and committed as
part "of the decision shall be Imple-
mented by the lead agency or other
appropriate consenting agency. The
lead agency shall:
(a) Include appropriate conditions In
grants, permits or other approvals.
(b) Condition funding of actions on
mitigation. '
(e) Upon request. Inform cooperating
or commenting agencies on progress In
carrying out mitigation measures
which they have proposed and which
were adopted by the agency making
the decision.
id) Upon request, make available lo
the public the results of relevant mon-
itoring.
-------
FAIT ISM-OTHER REQUIREMENTS
or NEPA
See.
ISM.I Limitation! en action* durlni NEPA
ISM! EllmlnMlon of duplication «lth
SUte and local procedures.
1506.1 Adoption.
ISM.4 Comblnlns document!.
ISMS Agency reiponaiblllty.
I MM 6 Public Involvement.
ISM1 Further guidance.
ISM.I Propoaala lor tof lalatlon.
ISM> Flllni nqulrementa.
ISM.IO Tlmlni o( titncy scllon.
IftM.II Emcnenelca
ISM.lt Effective date
AUTHoamr: NEPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970. aa
amended 141U 8.C 4311 (I MO. I. aee. IN ol
the Clean Air Act. aa amended 141 U8C.
noil, and EO. 11114 (Mar. 1. 1*10. aa
amended by E.O UNI. May 14.1*111.
Somcc 43 PR MOM. No*. M. 1(11. unleia
otncnvlw noted.
IISM.I Limitation* on action* during
NEPA proem
in Until an agency Issues a record of
decision as provided In 11505.2 (except
as provided In paragraph lei of this
section i. no action concerning the pro-
posal shall be taken which would:
.(I) Have an adverse environmental
Impact: or
ill Limit the choice of reasonable al-
ternatives.
(bl If any agency Is considering an
application from a non-Federal entity.
and Is aware that the applicant Is
about to take an action within the
agency's Jurisdiction that would meet
either of the criteria In paragraph (a)
of this section, then the agency shall
promptly notify the applicant that the
agency will lake appropriate action to
Insure that the objectives and proce-
dures of NEPA are achieved.
(c) While work on a required pro-
gram environmental Impact statement
Is In progress and the action Is not cov-
ered by an existing program state-
ment, agencies shall not undertake In
the Interim any major Federal action
covered by the program which may
significantly affect the quality of the
human environment unless such
action:
11) Is Justified Independently of the
program:
<2) Is Itself accompanied by an ade-
quate environmental Impact state-
ment: and
(3) Will not prejudice the ultimate
decision on the program. Interim
action prejudices the ultimate decision
on the program when It tends to deter-
mine subsequent development or limit
alternatives.
(d) This section does not preclude
development by applicants of plans or
designs or performance of other work
necessary to support an application
for Federal. State or local permits or
assistance. Nothing In this section
shall preclude Rural Electrification
Administration approval of minimal
expenditures not affecting the envi-
ronment <«.p. long leadtlme equipment
and purchase options) made by non-
governmental entitles seeking loan
guarantees from the Administration.
SUM and local procedure*.
(a) Agencies authorised by law to co-
operate with State agencies of state-
wide Jurisdiction pursuant to section
I02I2MD) of the Act may do so.
fb) Agencies shall cooperate with
State and local agencies to the fullest
extent possible to reduce duplication
between NEPA and Slate and local re-
quirements, unless the agencies are
specifically barred from doing so by
some other law. Except for eases cov-
ered by paragraph (a) of this section.
such cooperation shall to the fullest
extent possible Include:
(11 Joint planning processes.
(2) Joint environmental research
and studies.
13) Joint public hearings (except
where otherwise provided by statute).
(4) Joint environmental assessments.
(c) Agencies shall cooperate with
SUte and local agencies to the fullest
extent possible to reduce duplication
between NEPA and comparable State
and local requirements, unless the
agencies are specifically barred from
doing so by some other law: Except for
cases covered by paragraph la) of this
section, such cooperation shall to the
fullest extent possible Include Joint en-
vironmental Impact statements. In
II
suclTcases one or more Federal agen-
cies and one or more Stale or local
agencies shall be Joint lead agencies.
Where Stale laws or local ordinances
have environmental Impact statement
requirements In addition to but not In
conflict with those In NEPA. Federal
agencies shall cooperate In fulfilling
these requirements as well as those of
Federal laws so that one document
will comply with all applicable laws.
(d) To belter Integrate environmen-
tal Impact statements Into Stale or
local planning processes, statements
shall discuss any Inconsistency of a
proposed action with any approved
State or local plan and laws I whether
or not federally sanctioned). Where an
Inconsistency exists, the statement
should describe the extent to which
the agency would reconcile Its pro-
posed action with Ihe plan or law.
la) An agency may adopt, a Federal
draft or final environmental Impact
statement or portion thereof provided
lhat the statement or portion thereof
meets the standards for an adequate
statement under these regulations.
(bl If the actions covered by the
original environmental Impact state-
ment and the proposed action are sub-
stantially the same, the agency adopt-
ing another agency's statement Is not
required to redreulate It except as a
final statement. Otherwise the adopt-
ing agency shall treat the statement as
draft and reclrculaie It (except as
provided In paragraph (c) of this sec-
tion).
(c) A cooperating agency may adopt
without reelreulallng the environmen-
tal Impact statement of a lead .agency
when, after an Independent review of
the statement, the cooperating agency
concludes that Its comments and sug-
gestions have been satisfied.
(d) When an agency adopts a state-
ment which Is not final within the
agency that prepared It. or when the
action It assesses Is the subject of a re-
ferral under Part 1504. or when the
-statement's adequacy Is the subject of
a Judicial action which Is not final, the
agency shall so specify.
«ISM.4 Cnmblalni document!
Any environmental document in
compliance with NEPA may be com-
bined with any other agency docu-
ment to reduce duplication and paper-
work.
I ISMS Atency reepraalbllllr
Environmental impact Hale-
mentt. Except as provided In II 1906.2
and 15M.3 any environmental Impact
statement prepared pursuant to the
requirements of NEPA shall be pre-
pared directly by or by a contractor se-
lected by the lead agency or where ap-
propriate under I ISOl.Mb). a cooper-
ating agency. It Is the Intent of these
regulations that the contractor br
chosen solely by the lead agency, or by
the lead agency In cooperation with
cooperating agencies, or where appro-
priate by a cooperating agency to
avoid any conflict of Interest. Contrac-
tors shall execute a disclosure state-
ment prepared by the lead agency, or
where appropriate the cooperating
agency, specifying that they have no
financial or other Interest in the out-
11
-------
n
i>
10
come of the project. If the document
Is prepared by contract, the responsi-
ble Federal official shall furnish guid-
ance and participate In the prepara-
tion and shall Independently evaluate
the statement prior la Its approval and
take responsibility for Its scope and
contents. Nothing In this section I* In-
tended to prohibit any agency from re-
questing any person to submit Infor-
mation to It or to prohibit any person
from submitting Information to any
Agencies shall:
(a) Make diligent efforts to Involve
the public In preparing and Imple-
menting their NEPA procedure*.
Solicit appropriate Information
from the public.
(e) Explain m Its procedures where
Interested person* can get Information
or status reports on environmental
Impact statement* and other elements
ol the NEPA process.
(f) Make environmental Impact
statement*, the comment* received.
and any underlying document* avail-
able to the public pursuant to the pro-
visions of the Freedom of Information
Act 15 VAC. tUt. without regard to
the exclusion for urterageney memo-
randa where such memoranda trans-
mit comment* of Federal agencies on
the environmental Impact of the pro-
posed action. Material* to be made
available to the public shall be provid-
ed to the public without charge to the
extent practicable, or at a fee which Is
not more than the actual cosia of re-
producing copies required to be sent to
other Federal agencies. Including the
M
IISSS.T Further guMMn.
The Council may provide further
guidance concerning NEPA and Its
procedures Including:
(a) A handbook which the Council
may supplement from time to time.
which shall In plain language provide
guidance and Instruction* concerning
the application of NEPA and these
regulations.
(b> Publication of the Council's
Memoranda to Heads of Agencies.
(c) In conjunction with the Environ-
mental Protection Agency and the
publication of the 10* Monitor, notice
of:
(I) Research activities:
(t) Meetings and conferences related
to NEPA: and
(3) Successful and Innovative proce-
dures used by agencies to Implement
NEPA.
IMM.I PrapoMb far b*M«lm.
(al The NEPA process for proposals
for legislation (11608.171 significantly
affecting the quality of the human en-
vironment shall be Integrated with the
legislative process of the Congress. A
legislative environmental Impact state-
ment ts the detailed statement re-
quired by law to be Included In a rec-
ommendation or report on a legislative
proposal to Congress. A legislative en-
vironmental Impact statement shall be
considered part of the formal trans-
initial of a legislative proposal to Con-
gress however. It may be transmitted
to Congress up to 30 days later In
order to allow time for completion of
an accurate statement which can serve
as the basis for public and Congres-
sional debate. The statement must be
available In time for Congressional
hearing* and deliberations.
-------
9
during the preceding week. The mini-
mum time periods set forth In this sec-
tion shall be calculated from the date
of publication of this notice.
(b> No decision on the proposed
action shall be made or recorded
under 11509.2 by a Federal agency
until the later of the following dates:
(1) Ninety (00) days after publica-
tion of the notice described above In
paragraph (a) of this section, for a
draft environmental Impact statement.
(3) Thirty (30) days after publication
of the notice described above In para-
graph (a> of this section for a final en-
vironmental Impact statement.
An exception to the rules en timing
may be made In the ease of an agency
decision which Is subject to a formal
Internal appeal. Some agencies have a
formally established appeal process
which allows other agencies or the
public to take appeals on a decision
and make their views known, after
publication of the final environmental
Impact statement. In such cases.
where a real opportunity exists to
alter the decision, the decision may be
made and recorded at the same time
the environmental Impact statement Is
published. This means that the period
for appeal of the decision and the 30-
day period prescribed In paragraph
(bx3i of this section may run concur-
rently. In such cases the environmen-
tal Impact statement shall explain the
timing and the public's right of
appeal. An agency engaged In rule-
making under the Administrative Pro-
cedure Act or other statute for the
purpose of protecting the public
health or safety, may waive the time
period In paragraph .)
Failure to file timely comments shall
not be a sufficient reason for extend-
ing a period. If the lead agency does
not concur with the extension of lime.
EPA may not extend It for more than
30 days. When the Environmental Pre-
lection Agency reduces or extends any
period of time It shall notify the Coun-
cil.
141 FKIMM. No*.». UTK 44 Fit I'M. Jan.
i. imi
flSOt.il
Where emergency circumstances
make It necessary to take an action
with significant environmental Impact
without observing the provisions of
these regulations, the Federal agency
taking the action should consult with
the Council about alternative arrange-
ments. Agencies and the Council will
limit such arrangements to actions
necessary to control the Immediate Im-
pacts of the emergency. Other actions
remain subject to NEPA review.
IHOs.1t Effetnraaite.
The effective date of these regula-
tions Is July 30. 1070. except that for
agencies that administer programs
that qualify under section IOXIHDI of
the Act or under see. UHdit or the
Housing and Community Development
Act of 1074 an additional four months
shall be allowed for the Slate or local
agencies to adopt their Implementing
procedures.
(a) These regulations shall apply to
the fullest extent practicable to ongo-
ing activities and environmental docu-
ments begun before the effective date.
These regulations do not apply to an
environmental Impact statement or
supplement If the draft statement was
tiled before the effective date of these
regulations. No completed environ-
mental documents need be redone by
reasons of these regulations. Until
these regulations an applicable, the
Council's guidelines published In the
FEMKM. Rcoiira of August I. 1073.
shall continue to be applicable. In
cases where these regulations are ap-
plicable the guidelines are superseded.
However, nothing shall prevent an
agency from proceeding under these
regulations at an earlier time.
(bl NEPA shall continue to be appli-
cable to actions begun before January
1. 10TO. to the fullest extent possible.
IS07 AOINCV COMPIIANCI
ISOt.l Compliance
1401.J Aiency capability to comply.
1501.1 Aseaey procedures.
AtTTHomrr: NEPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Art ol 1*10. as
amended 141 IU.C. 4171 tl itt.-i. see IN of
UM Clean Air Act. as amended 141 US.C.
MOB), and EO. 11114 iMar. ft. »M. a*
amended by E.O.11 Wl. May 14. IK7I. '
Bomcc 41 Fit MOM. No*. IS. IMS. lining
11607.1 Compliance.
All agencies of the Federal Govern-
ment shall comply with these regula-
tions. It Is the Intent of these regula-
tions to allow each agency flexibility
In adapting Its Implementing proce-
dures authorized by I IMT.J to the re-
quirements of other applicable laws.
11907.1 Agency capability to carnal*.
Each agency shall be capable (In
terms of personnel and other re-
sources) of complying with the re-
quirements enumerated below. Such
compliance may Include use of other's
resources, but the using agency shall
Itself have sufficient capability to
evaluate what others do for It. Agen-
cies shall:
(a) Fulfill the requirements of sec-
tion I02C3XA) of the Act to utilise a
systematic. Interdisciplinary approach
which will Insure the Integrated use of
the natural and social sciences and the
environmental design arts In planning
and In deelstonmaklag which may
have an Impact on the human environ-
ment. Agencies shall designate a
person to be responsible lor overall
review of agency NEPA compliance.
-------
and the Council to coordinate tltelr
procedures, especially for programs re-
questing similar Intarmallon Irani ap-
plicant*. The procedures shall He-
adopted only alter an opportunity for
public review and alter review by the
Council lor conformity with the Act
and these regulations. The Council
shall complete Its review within 30
days. Once In effect they shall be Hied
with the Council and made readily
available to the public. Agencies are
encouraged to publish explanatory
guidance for these regulations end
their own procedures. Agencies shall
continue to review their policies and
procedures and In consultation with
the Council to-revise them as neces-
sary to ensure lull compliance with
the purposes and provisions of the
Act.
Agency procedures shall comply
with these regulations except where
compliance would be Inconsistent with
statutory requirement* and shall In-
clude:
411 Those procedures required by
II IBOl.aid). 130Z.WCK3). 1SM.1.
l5M.B(e>. and ISOB.4.
<» Specific criteria for and Identifi-
cation of those typical classes of
action:
(I) Which normally do require envi-
ronmental Impact statement*.
(Ill Which normally do not require
either an environmental Impact state-
ment or an environmental assessment
(categorical exclusions (I IMM.III.
till) Which normally require envi-
ronmental assessment* but not neces-
sarily environmental Impact state-
ments.
Agency procedures may Include
1 specific criteria lor providing limited
exceptions to the provisions of these
regulations for classified proposals.
They are proposed actions which sre
specifically authorised under criteria
established by an Executive Order or
statute to be kept secret In the Inter-
est of national defense or foreign
policy and are In fact properly classi-
fied pursuant to such Executive Order
or statute. Environmental assessments
and environmental Impact statement*
which address classified proposals may
be safeguarded and restricted from
public dissemination In accordance
with agencies' own regulations applica-
ble to classified Information. These
documents may be organized so that
classified portions can be Included a*
annexe*. In order thai the unclassified
pontons can be made available to the
public.
Agency procedures may provide
that when there Is a lengthy period
between the agency is decision to pre-
pare an environment*! impact state-
ment and the Ume of actual prepara-
tion, the notice of Intent required by
I IWI.1 may be published at a reason-
able time In advance of preparation or
the draft statement.
PAN 13
-TElMINOlOOr AND
Sec.
ISM. I
19011
1HS.I
1MI1
IMMJ.1
1908 «
ISM1
lUt.1
1908*
I MS 10
IMWI1
IMS II
IHI.I1
190814
1908 IS
1508.1*
1)0811
11081*
ISOS.lt
1108.10
1908.11
1908.11
1908.11
1908.14
1908.15
1908 IB
190817
190818
Temumlogr.
Act.
Affecting.
Categorical estluilon.
Effects.
En
Environments! document.
Environments! Unmet MMcmcni
Flndlns of no mnlllcsnt Impact
Jurisdiction bjr Is*
Leadateney.
LeglstsUon.
Major FMeral action.
Matter
Notice of Intent.
Bluunnnilv.
TlerlBf.
Avmosirv: NEPA. the Environment*!
QusJity Imprarawnl An of ItTtV- «
Mended til UJLC. 4111 el HC.I. sre. 30* ol
the Clew Air Act. u amended 141 VAC.
T*0»). and EO. 11814 iMsr. 9. 1*10. u
intended ay E O. I lt>l. M«r 14. KIT)
Sowcc 41 m am*. Hot ae. ISIS, unlea
olherwlM noted.
n
IIMS.I Termlnobw.
The terminology ol this part shall
be uniform throughout ihe Federal
Government.
iisoat An.
"Act" means the National Environ-
mental Policy Act. as amended 142
U.8.C. 4.111. et seq.) which la also re-
ferred to as "NEPA."
11901.1 AlfKltni.
"Affecting" means will or may have
an effect on.
I1SW.I fsMcorksl mliHloa.
"Categorical exclusion" means a cat-
egory of actions which do not Individ-
ually or cumulatively have a signifi-
cant effect on the human environment
and which have been found to have no
such (fleet In procedures adapted by a
Federal agency in Implementation of
these regulations (| 1907.3) and for
which, therefore, neither an environ-
mental assessment nor an environmen-
tal Impact statement Is required. An
agency may decide In Its procedures or
otherwise, to prepare environmental
assessments for the reasons slated In
11MB. 9 even though II Is not required
to do so. Any procedures under this
section shall provide for extraordinary
circumstances In which a normally ex-
cluded action may have a significant
environmental effect.
II5DU Cooperating agency.
"Cooperating agency" means any
Federal agency other than a lead
agency which has Jurisdiction by law
or special expertise with respect to
any environmental Impact Involved In
a proposal < or a reasonable alterna-
tive I for . legislation or oilier major
Federal action significantly affecting
the quality of the human environ-
ment. The selection and responsibil-
ities of a cooperating agency are de-
scribed In 11SOI.4. A State or local
agency of similar qualifications or.
when the effects are on a reservation.
an Indian Tribe, may by agreement
with the lead agency become a cooper-
ating agency.
Hi son.*
Council" means the Council on En
vlronmentsl Quality eslstfluhed by
Title tl of the Act.
RI9M.T CHmul
Cumulative Impact" Is the Impact
on the environment which results
from the Incremental Impact of the
action when added to other past.
present, and reasonably foreseeable
future actions regardless ol what
agency (Federal or non-Federal) or
person undertakes such other actions.
Cumulative Impacts can result from
Individually minor but collectively sig-
nificant actions taking place over a
period of time.
II90HJI Rffecii.
Effects" Include:
( a) Direct effects, which are caused;
by the action and occur at the same
time and place.
ib» Indirect effects, which are caused
by the icllon and are later in time or
farther removed In distance, but are
still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect
effecti may Include growth Inducing
effects and olher effects related to In-
duced changes In the pattern of land
use. population density or growth rale.
and related effects on air and water
and olher natural systems, including
ecasyilenu-
Effccts and Impacts as used In these
regulations are synonymous. Effects
Includes ecological
-------
Ul
whether lo prepare in environmental
Input statement or finding o! no
significant Impact.
tit AH an agency's compliance with
the Act when no environment*]
Impact lutement to necessary.
ill PgelllUte preparation of flat*-
ment when one la necessary.
ib) Shall Include brief discussions or
the need for the proposal, of alterns-
tlvea aa required by section lOXdXE).
of the environmental Impact* of the
propoted action and alternative*, and
a Ilitltu of agencies and penmna con-
sulted.
IIU8.ro Knvlranmrnuldoammii.
Environmental document" Include*
the doeumenta specified In I »M.«
(environmental assessment). 1 1M8.1I
(environmental Impact statement).
I IRoa.13 (finding of no significant
Impact), and 11508.12 (notice of
intend.
I r5M.ll endrwimMftsI Impact lists-
environmental Impact statement"
mean* a detailed written atalement a*
required by section 10K1KCI of the
Act.
IMM.lt Federalaiency.
Federal agency" mean* ill agencies
of the Federal Government. It doc*
not mean the ContreH. the Judiciary.
or the President. Including the per-
formance of staff function* for the
president In his Executive Office. It
also Include! (of purposes of these reg-
ulations State* and units of general
local government and Indian tribe* aa-
turning NEPA tespon*lblllMea under
section I04IM of the Housing and
Community Development Act of I9M.
11101.1) Finding of ao significant Impact
"Finding of no significant Impact"
mean* a document by Federal
agency briefly presenting the reason!
why an action, not otherwise excluded
<|150l.4>. will not have a siuiiileant
effect on the human environment and
for which an environmental Impact
statement therefore will not be pre-
pared. It (hall Include the environ-
mental assessment or a luminary of It
and (hall note any other environmen-
tal doeumenta related to It
(I I50I,1(BH6». If the assessment la In-
cluded. the finding need not repeat
any of the discussion in the assess-
ment but may Incorporate' It by refer-
ence.
IHf.ll Human mrinmual.
"Human environment" shall be In-
terpreted comprehensively to Include
the natural and physical environment
and the relationship of people with
that environment. (Be* the definition
of "effects" . Actions
do not Include funding assistance
solely In the form of general revenue
sharing funds, distributed under the
State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act
of 1B7J. 31 VAC. l»l et seq.. with no
Federal agency control over the subse-
quent use of such fund*. Action* do
not Include bringing Judicial or admin-
istrative civil or criminal enforcement
actions.
(bl Federal actions tend to fall
within one of the following categories:
(I) Adoption of official policy, such
as rules, regulations, and Interpreta-
tions adopted pursuant to the Admin-
istrative Procedure Act. » U.8.C. SSI et
seq.; treaties and International conven-
tions or agreements: formal docu-
ments establishing an agency's policies
which will result In or substantially
alter agency program*.
at Adoption of formal plans, such as
official documents prepared or ap-
proved by federal agencies wMeh
guide or prescribe alternative uses of
federal resource*, upon which future
agency action* will be based.
(» Adoption of programs, such as a
group of concerted actions to Imple-
ment a specific policy or plan: system-
atic and connected agency decision* al-
locating agency resource* lo Imple-
ment a specific statutory program or
executive directive.
Ml Approval of specific projects.
such a* construction or management
activities located In a defined geo-
graphic area. Project* Include actions
approved by permit or other regula-
tory decision as well as federal and
federally asuated activities.
KISOH.I9 Halter.
Matter" Includes for' purposes el
Part 1504:
(at With respect to the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency, any proposed
legislation, protect, action or muta-
tion as those terms are used In section
aoMa> of the Clean Air Act (42 VS.C.
16M).
(b) With respect to all other agen-
cies. any proposed major federal
action lo which section 102IZMC) of
NEPA applies.
IIMN.ZO Mitigation.
Mitigation" Includes:
i at Avoiding the Impact MKja.et.her
by not taking a certain action or parts
of an action.
ib) Minimising Impact* by limiting
the degree or magnitude of the action
and Its Implementation.
ic) Rectifying the Impact by repair-
Ing. rehabilitating, or restoring the si
fceted environment
tat Reducing- or eliminating (he
Impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations during the
life of the action.
ID Compensating; for the Impact by
replacing or providing substitute re-
sources or environments.
DI5M.il
NEPA process" means all measures
necessary for compliance with the re-
quirement* of section a and Title I of
NEPA.
4ISM.lt Nnlk* of mteirt.
"Notice of Intent" means a notice
thst an environmental Impact state-
ment will be prepared and considered.
The notice shall briefly:
ia> Describe the proposed action and
possible alternative*.
ilil Describe the agency's proposed
scoping process Including whether.
when, and where any scoping meeting
will be held.
(cl State the name and address of a
person within the agency who can
answer questions about the ptoposrd
action and the environmental Impact
statement.
-------
n
>
ON
IIS88.U Prasoul.
"Proposal" exists at thai stage In
the development of an action when an
agency subject to the Act has a goal
and Is actively preparing to make a de-
cision on one or more alternative
means of accomplishing that goal and
the effects can be meaningfully evalu-
ated. Preparation of an environmental
Impact statement on a proposal should
be timed (11803.8) so that the final
statement may be completed In time
for the statement to be Included In
any recommendation or report on the
proposal. A proposal may exist In fact
as well as by agency declaration that
one exists.
IIBOg.I1 Referring igency.
Referring agency" means the feder-
al agency which has referred any
matter to the Council after a determi-
nation that the matter Is unsatisfac-
tory from the standpoint of public
health or welfare or environmental
quality.
11508.15 Scope.
Scope consists of the range of ac-
tions, alternatives, and Impacts to be
considered In an environmental Impact
statement. The scope of an Individual
statement may depend on Its relation-
ships to other statements (111802.20
and 1608.28). To determine the scope
of environmental Impact statements.
agencies shall consider S types of ac-
tions. 3 types of alternatives, and 3
types of Impacts. They Include:
Actions (other than unconnected
single actions) which may be: ,
(I) Connected actions, which means
that they are closely related and
therefore should be discussed In the
same Impact statement. Actions are
connected If they:
(I) Automatically trigger other ac-
tions which may require environmen-
tal Impact statements.
(II) Cannot or will not proceed unless
other actions are taken previously or
simultaneously.
(Ill) Are Interdependent parts of a
larger action and depend on the larger
action for their Justification.
(2) Cumulative actions, which when
viewed with other proposed actions
have cumulatively significant Impacts
and should therefore be discussed In
the same Impact statement.
(3) Similar actions, which when
viewed with other reasonably foreseea-
ble or proposed agency actions, have
similarities that provide a basis for
evaluating their environmental conse-
queneles together, such as common
timing or geography. An agency may
wish to analyse these actions In the
same Impact statement. It should do
so when the best way to assess ade-
quately the combined Impacts of simi-
lar actions or reasonable alternatives
to such actions Is to treat them In a
single Impact statement.
(b) Alternatives, which Include: (I)
No action alternative.
(2) Other reasonable courses of ac-
tions.
(3) Mitigation measures (not In the
(c> Impacts, which may be: (I)
Direct: Ml Indirect: (3) cumulative.
OlSAUf Special eiperUse.
"Special expertise" means statutory
responsibility, agency mission, or re-
lated program experience.
IIUMT SlgnlHcMlly.
"Significantly" as used In NEPA re-
quires considerations of both context
and Intensity:
(a) Context This means that the sig-
nificance of an action must be ana-
lyzed In several contexts such as socie-
ty as a whole (human, national), the
affected region, the affected Interests.
and the locality. Significance varies
with the setting of the proposed
action. For Instance. In the case of a
site-specific action, significance would
usually depend upon the effects In the
locale rather than In the world as a
whole. Both short- and long-term ef-
fects are relevant.
(b) /nfeiuiiy. This refers to the se-
verity of Impact. Responsible officials
must bear In mind that more than one
agency may make decisions about par-
tial aspects of a major action. The fol-
lowing should be considered In evalu-
ating Intensity:
(I) Impacts that may be both benefi-
cial and advene. A significant effect
may exist even If the Federal agency
believes that on balance the effect will
be beneficial.
(2) The degree to which the pro-
posed action affects public health or
safety.
(3) Unique characteristics of the geo-
graphic area such as proximity to his-
toric or cultural resources, park lands.
prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and
scenic rivers, or ecologically critical
(«> The degree to which the effects
on the quality of the human environ-
ment are likely to be highly controver-
sial.
(8) The degree to which the possible
effects on the human environment are
highly uncertain or Involve unique or
unknown risks.
(8) The degree to which the action
may establish a precedent for future
actions with significant effects or rep-
resents a decision In principle about a
future consideration.
(7) Whether the action Is related to
other actions with Individually Insig-
nificant but cumulatively significant
Impacts. Significance exists If It Is rea-
sonable to anticipate a cumulatively
significant Impact on the environment.
Significance cannot be avoided by
terming an action temporary or by
breaking It down Into small compo-
nent parts.
(8) The degree to which the action
may adversely affect districts, sites.
highways, structures, or objects listed
In or eligible for listing In the National
Register of Historic Places or may
cause loss or destruction of significant
scientific, cultural, or historical re-
IB) The degree to which the action
may adversely affect an endangered or
threatened species or Its habitat that
has been determined to' be critical
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973.
(10) Whether the action threatens a
violation of Federal. State, or local law
or requirements Imposed for the pro-
tection of the environment.
MI nrseooa. NO*, n. ing; 44 nt m Jan.
3. itni
01505.18 Tiering.
"Tiering" refers to the coverage ol
general matters In broader environ-
mental Impact statements (such as na-
tional program or policy statements i
with subsequent narrower statements
or environmental analyses (such as re-
gional or baslnwlde program state-
ments or ultimately site-specific state-
ments) Incorporating by reference the
general discussions and concentrating
solely on the Issues specific to the
statement subsequently prepared.
Tiering Is appropriate when the se-
quence of statements or analyses tor
(a) From a program, plan, or policy
environmental Impact statement to a
program, plan, or policy statement or
analysis of lesser scope or to a site-spe-
cific statement or analysis.
(b) From an environmental Impact
statement on a specific action at air
early stage (such ss need and site se-
lection) to a supplement (which Is pre-
ferred) or a subsequent statement or
analysis at a later stage (such as envi-
ronmental mitigation). Tiering In such
cases Is appropriate when It helps the
lead agency to focus on the Issues
which are ripe for decision and ex-
clude from consideration Issues al-
ready decided or not yet ripe.
Ji
M
-------
lNOf»-Continued
! I9004M
IWI MM)
INDEXCommuM
19011 MM no, twt
mil noii mi
MMl IIOU. Mil
mil notf. ngii
mil MB* mil.
Will IOBI1 IHiN,
MilHlll.
IIIMJI
MM
"S8
IMMB.MMI
ijoi MM
iwi nnn
isoi OKI isw IIKI
I*MIUHJ>
.
ItWIt 1901 li
imj not it
noil
I9MI IM<|.
190) It
IWt) 1901 ID
I9MMU IMSJ ,
I90>M
I9MIM I101II
I9MII
IWI Ml
1901 r I9M9M I1MM
itonmai
i Ma ii
IMOWI iioi rM i90> r
19099m 1901 KM.
I90J «il I5MII
ISOOt I90XM
IMflMU
I WOW HM4 IMIM
1900 II
1901 IUHHM
MOW
DIOHI
i9oo no
IWI I
I90I4IH
IWI I
19011
IW)II
i9« mini,
1901 I 190) I
IWIOM 190) I)
IJOJJ 19011
I9MI. INK) I*
I9MMI
19011 IMO I9M)
190)
IWIIM
190) M
1909 4M. 190)
--- ._
1901 4M>
ite)n 1901)1
190) n
iwi m
IWI I
190)1
I MOM
1909 ill). 190) >
1901
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841,
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
PROCEDURES FQP IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ON
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
(40 CODE OF REGULATIONS PART fl
D-l
-------
PI. 6
11.7 Waiver of fee.
Waivers of the fuH tuition fee may
be granted on a limited basis. Each
waiver request must be Justified and
considered by cognitive EPA unite on:
(a) Severity of the pollution problem
In the area In which the applicant em-
ployee bt working; (b) bona-flde admin-
istrative or legal constraints of the ap-
plicant agency to pay the reduced fee;
(c) service, resulting from the training
that will be provided as a benefit to
the Pederal Government. No waivers
will be granted for field courses. Waiv-
ers are provided as a transitional ease-
ment for exceptional casea and will
not be granted after July 1.1975.
6.8 Appeal of waiver denial.
Waiver denials *"^y be appealed to
.the Office of Education and Manpow-
er Planning. Washington. DC 10460. to
adjudicate and expedite agency
review. Appeal submissions should In-
clude copies of original application
and justification for waiver. EPA regis-
tration office denial correspondence.
and other pertinent Information sup-
porting the request for waiver.
FAR? efiocawmis KM IMPLB-
Manmo mi uountiMEMTS OF
TMi COUNCIL ON BtVOKNIMIN-
TAl QUALITY ON TM NATIONAL
NVIIONMINTM rOUCY ACT
See.
f 4.100
.100 General.
.101 landmarks, historical, and archeo-
logical sltea.
MM Wetlands, noodplalna. Important
fan"
riven, flan and wildlife, and endangered
PfllM -
MM Air quality.
Sec.
6.7M
.101 Definition.
.761 Applicability.
AIM General.
.104
6.108 Environmental assessment and find-
Ing of no significant bnpaet
6.701 Environmental tanpaet statement
6.4M Public Involvement.
6.461 Of f letal tiling requirements.
.401 Availability ol documents.
.401 TtteeommenUi
.404 Supplements.
6.900 Purpose.
.Ml Definitions.
.Ml Applicability and limitations.
.801 Overview of the
review process.
6.604 Consultation during the faculties
planning process.
MS Categorical exclusions.
0.606 Envflfftnutietitgtl review iwoccn.
.801 Partitioning the environmental
.Ml Applicability.
6.101 Criteria for preparing EIBs.
6.601 Envrronmental rerle* proces
.604 Record of decision.
artWU
000 Purpose.
.Ml Definitions.
J01 Applicability.
6.M1 Criteria for preparing EIBs.
6.M4 Environmental review proora
.MB Record of decision.
efgMAdvaM
«.IM Purpose and policy.
.101 Definitions.
.101 ApplkabUlly.
.101 Responsibilities.
.104 Early Involvement of private parties.
.108 Synopsis of environmental review
.MB Findings of No Significant Impact
(ntBDoetennbutlon.
MM Criteria for Initiating Environmental
Impact Statements (EIBL
.BIO Environmental Impact Statement
(D8) preparation.
.Bll Record of Decision (RODI for EISs
and Uentlfleauon of mlUcaUon meat-
.1001
6.1001
Purpose and policy.
Applicability.
6.1001 Definitions.
.1004 Environmental review and
.106 Deviations.
.101
.Bll Monitoring for compliance.
Mil Public parUdpalton.
MI4 Delegation to Stales.
lnfc.nl f B»ira.a«».sii»sli«vlesrPi
.101 Criteria lor Initiating an 1
far M» I
.IOM JUadori
6.1006 EiempUons and considerations.
.1001 lawlemenlalton.
Ammnx A m Pun BBrmnrr or Pao-
csDoass on FuoBtum MuMOBMnrr AMD
Wsnune Psoracnon
101. 101. and IN of the
I Policy Act or 166*
(41DAC. 4111 et sea.« aba. the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulation* dated
Nov. W. I01B (40 CPR part ISM!.
Somcc 44 PR 64177. Nov. 6. 107S. unless
6.200 The environmental bnpaet stale-
SMI Format.
.Ml becullve summary.
M01 Body of EIBs.
.a** incorporation by reference.
6 'it of preparers.
.Ml Definition!.
.Ml Applicability.
.Ml Limitations on actions during envi-
ronmental review process.
04 Environmental review process.
.60S Criteria for preparing EISs.
606 Record of decision.
6607 BfonKormg.
Eenrniu. Note Nomenchaure changes
affecting part appear at M PR 16118. June
AIMS.
StfbportA Oeneiul
I6.IM Purpose and policy.
'a) The National Environmental
Icy Act of 1989 (NEPA). 43 VAC.
40CltCK.I(7.|.*ICdli|M)
4321 et teg., as Implemented by Execu-
tive Orders 11514 and 11001 and the
Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) Regulations of November M.
1978 (43 PR 55*71) requires that Fed-
eral agencies Include In their declf Ion-
making processes appropriate and
careful consideration of all environ-
mental effects of proposed actions.
analyze potential environmental ef-
fects of proposed actions and their al-
ternatives for public understanding
and scrutiny, avoid or minimize ad-
vene effects of proposed actions.'and
restore and enhance environmental
quality as much as possible. The Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency (EPA)
shall Integrate these NEPA factors as
early In the Agency planning processes
as possible. The environmental review
process shall be the focal point to
i NEPA considerations are taken
Into account To the extent applicable.
EPA shall prepare environmental
Impact statements (EISs) on those
major actions determined to have sig-
nificant Impact on the quality of the
human environment. This part Ukes
Into account the E1S exemption* set
forth under section Bll(cKl) of the
Clean Water Act This part establishes EPA policy
and procedures for the Identification
and analysis of the environmental Im-
pacts of EPA-related activities and Hie
preparation and processing of EIBs.
6.101 Definitions.
(a) TtormiRolomr. All terminology
used In this part will be eonsbtent
with the terms as defined In .40 CPR
part 1508 (the CEQ Regulations). Any
qualifications will be provided In the
definitions set forth In each subpart of
this regulation.
(b) The term CEQ Refutation*
means the regulations Issued by the
Council on Environmental Quality on
November 29. 1978 (see 43 PR BB01B).
which Implement Executive Order
11991 The CEQ Regulations will often
be referred to throughout this regula-
tion by reference to 40 CPR part 1500
etaL
-------
The term grant as used In this
part means an award of funds or other
assistance by a written grant agree-
ment or cooperative agreement under
40 CFR Chapter I. subpart B.
08.101 Applicability.
fal Admlnlttratlve actloni covered.
This part applies to the activities of
EPA In accordance with the outline of
the subparts set forth below. Each
subpart describes the detailed environ-
mental review procedures required for
each action.
(II Subpart A sets forth an overview
of the regulation. Section 8.10ttb> de-
scribes the requirements for EPA leg-
islative proposals.
<» Subpart B describes the require-
ments for the content of an EIS pre-
pared pursuant to subparts E. F. Q. H.
and I.
(3) Subpart C describes the require-
ments for coordination of all environ-
mental laws during the environmental
review undertaken pursuant to sub-
parts E. P. O. H. and I.
(41 Subpart D describes the public
Information requirements which must
'be undertaken In conjunction with the
environmental review requirements
under subparte E. P. O. H. and I.
(S) Subpart E describes the environ-
mental review requirements for the
wastewater treatment construction
grants program under Title II of the
Clean Water Act.
(6) Subpart F describes the environ-
mental review requirements for new
source National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDE8) permits
94.102
under section 402 of the Clean Water
Act.
(7) Subpart Q describes the environ-
mental review requirements for re-
search and development programs un-
dertaken by the Agency.
(8) Subpart H describes the environ-
mental review requirements for solid
waste demonstration projects under-
taken by the Agency.
<9> Subpart I describes the environ-
mental review requirements for con-
struction of special purpose faculties
and facility renovations by the
Agency.
(b> legislative proposal* As re-
quired by the CEQ Regulations, legis-
lative EISs are required for any legis-
lative proposal developed by EPA
which significantly affects the quality
of the human environment. A prelimi-
nary draft EIS shall be prepared by
the responsible EPA office concurrent-
ly with the development of the legisla-
tive proposal and contain Information
required under subpart B. The EIS
shall be processed In accordance with
the requirements set forth under 40
CFR 1606.8.
(c) 4ppMcaflon to ongoing acflvi-
Met(1) General The effective date
for these regulations Is December 6.
1979. These regulations do not apply
to an EIS or supplement to that EIS If
the draft EIS was filed with the Office
of External Affairs. (OEA) before July
30. 1910. No completed environmental
documents need be redone by reason
of these regulations.
<2> With regard to activities under
subpart E. these regulations shall
apply to all EPA environmental review
procedures effective December IS.
1979. However, for facility plans begun
before December IS. 1970. the respon-
sible official shall Impose no new re-
quirements on the grantee. Such
grantees shall comply with require-
ments applicable before the effective
date of this regulation. Notwithstand-
ing the above, this regulation shall
apply to any facility plan submitted to
EPA after September 30. 1980.
144 PR 64117. Nov, S. 197*. u amended it 41
PR 9829. Her. 8. 19821
(6.103
OC.IM RnpomlbllltlM.
(a) General responsibilities. (1) The
responsible official's duties Include:
(I) Requiring applicants, contractors.
and grantees to submit environmental
Information documents and related
documents and assuring that environ-
mental reviews are conducted on pro-
posed EPA projects at the earliest pos-
sible point In EPA's decision-making
process. In this regard, the responsible
official shall assure the early Involve-
ment and availability of Information
for private applicants and other non-
Federal entitles requiring EPA approv-
als.
(II) When required, assuring that
adequate draft EISs are prepared and
distributed at the earliest possible
point In EPA's decision-making proc-
ess, their Internal and external review
la coordinated, and final EISs are pre-
pared and distributed.
(Ill) When an EIS Is not prepared.
assuring documentation of the deci-
sion to grant a categorical exclusion.
or assuring that findings of no signifi-
cant Impact (FNSIs) and environmen-
tal assessments are prepared and dis-
tributed for those actions requiring
them.
(Iv) Consulting with appropriate of-
ficials responsible for other environ-
mental laws set forth In subpart C.
(v) Consulting with the Office of Ex-
ternal Affairs (OEA) on actions Involv-
ing unresolved conflicts concerning
this part or other Federal agencies.
(vl) When required, assuring that
public participation requirements are
met.
(3) Office of External Affairs duties
include: (I) Supporting the Adminis-
trator In providing EPA policy guid-
ance and assuring that EPA offices es-
tablish and maintain adequate admin-
istrative procedures to comply with
this part.
(II) Monitoring the overall timeliness
and quality of the EPA effort to
comply with this part.
(Ill) Providing assistance to responsi-
ble officials as required. I.e.. preparing
guidelines describing the scope of envi-
ronmental Information required by
private applicants relating to their
proposed actions.
(lv> Coordinating the training of per-
sonnel Involved In the review and
40 & Ch. I (7-1-01 Edmon)
preparation of EISs and other associ-
ated documents.
(v) Acting as' EPA liaison with the
Council on. Environmental Quality and
other Federal and State entitles on
matters of EPA policy and administra-
tive mechanisms to .facilitate external
review of EISs. to determine lead
agency and to Improve the uniformity
of the NEPA procedures of Federal
agencies.
(vl) Advising the Administrator and
Deputy Administrator on projects
which Involve more than one EPA
office, are highly controversial, are na-
tionally significant, or pioneer EPA
policy, when these projects have had
or should have an EIS prepared on
them.
(vll) Carrying out administrative
duties relating to maintaining status
of EISs within EPA. I.e.. publication of
notices of Intent In the PEDEHAL REGIS-
TER and making available to the public
status reports on EISs and other ele-
ments of the environmental review
(3) Office of an Aulttant Adminis-
trator duties include: (I) Providing spe-
cific policy guidance to their respec-
tive offices and assuring that those of-
fices establish and maintain adequate
administrative procedures to comply
with this part.
(II) Monitoring the overall timeliness
and quality of their respective office's
efforts to comply with this part.
(Ill) Acting as liaison between their
offices and the OEA and between
their offices and other Assistant Ad-
ministrators or Regional Administra-
tors on matters of agencywlde policy
and procedures.
(Iv) Advising the Administrator and
Deputy Administrator through the
OEA on projects or activities within
their respective areas of responsibil-
ities which Involve more than one EPA
office, are highly controversial, are na-
tionally significant, or pioneer EPA
policy, when these project* will have
or should have an EIS prepared on
them.
(v) Pursuant to 16.102(b> of this
subpart. preparing legislative EISs as
appropriate on EPA legislative Initia-
tives.
(4) The Office of Policy. Planning.
and Evaluation duties Include: respon-
-------
Blbllltlea for coordinating the prepara-
tion of EISs required on EPA legisla-
tive proposals In accordance with
16.10Mb>.
(b) JtetpoiulMMttef for rabpart E-
(1) Jtetpotuiote ojOflcfaJL The responsl-
ble official for EPA action* covered by
this subpart Is the Regional Adminis-
trator.
(3) Attittant Admtntitrator. The re
sponslbllllles of the Assistant Adminis-
trator, as described In |6.103(aX3).
shall be assumed by the Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Water for EPA actions
covered by this subpart.
(c) JtesponrtMftttei for nopart F-
(1) Jteiponstbte o/nctat The responsi-
ble official for activities covered by
this sutapart to the Regional Adminis-
trator.
(9) Assistant Administrator. The re-
sponslblllUes of the Assistant Adminis-
trator, as described In I6.103UK3).
shall be assumed by the Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Enforcement and Com-
pliance Monitoring for EPA actions
covered by this subpart.
ItespOMlMMtie* for tubpart Q.
The Assistant Administrator for Re-
search and Development will be the
responsible official for activities cov-
ered by this subpart.
It) RetponHbilttiet for suopart H.
The Assistant Administrator for Solid
Waste.and Emergency Response will
be the responsible official for activities
covered by this subpart.
RetpontibittUet for tubpart I.
The responsible official for new con-
struction and modification of special
purpose facilities Is as follows:
(I) The Chief. Facilities Engineering
and Real Estate Branch. Facilities and
Support Services Division. Office of
the Assistant Administrator for Ad-
ministration and Resource Manage
ment lOARM) shall be the responsible
official on all new construction of spe-
cial purpose facilities and on all new
modification projects for which the
Facilities Engineering and Real Estate
Branch has received a funding allow-
ance and for all other field compo-
nents not covered elsewhere In para-
graph (f) of this section.
(91 The Regional Administrator
- «l be the responsible official on all
wement and modification
(0.105
projects for which the regional office
has received the funding allowance.
144 PR W1TJ. Nov. 6. im. as amended at 47
PJt fgM. Mar. g. 1B82; 60 PR M}». June 36.
IMS: SI PR 12MB. Sept. IS. IMS!
I MM Karljr Mvohrcmeat of private par-
llea.
As required by 40 CFR 1801.9ld) and
|e.l03 of this regulation, re-
sponsible officials must ensure early
Involvement of private applicants or
other non-Federal entitles In the envi-
ronmental review process related to
EPA grant and permit actions set
forth under subparts E. F. O. and H.
The responsible official In conjunction
with OEA shall:
-------
InvhMMMM PMtocNon Agancy
Immediate Impacts of the emergency;
other actions remain subject to the en-
vironmental review process. The As-
atatant Administrator. OEA. after con
suiting CEQ. will Inform the responsi-
ble official, as expedlUoualy as possi-
ble of the disposition of his request.
(2) Where circumstances make It
necessary to take action without ob-
serving procedural provisions of these
regulations, the responsible official
shall notify the Assistant Administra-
tor. OEA. before taking such action. If
the Assistant Administrator. OEA. de-
termines such a deviation would be hi
the best Interest of the Government.
he shall Inform the responsible offi-
cial, as soon as possible, of his approv-
al.
(3) The Assistant Administrator.
OEA. shall coordinate his action on a
deviation under |8.106XbMD or (3) of
this part with the Director. Grants
Administration Division. Office of
Planning and Management, for any re-
quired grant-related, deviation under
40 CPR 30.1000. as well as the appro-
priate Assistant Administrator.
Ill PR Min. Mo*. 6. ten. a* intended at 41
PR MM. Mar. 8. 19811
01107 Categorical eidiutoiu.
(a) General Categories of actions
which do not Individually, cumulative-
ly over time, or In conjunction with
other Federal. State, local, or private
actions have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment
and which have been Identified as
having no such effect based on the re-
quirements In 16.605. may be exempt-
ed from the substantive environmental
review requirements of this part. Envi-
ronmental Information documents and
environmental assessments or environ-
mental Impact statements will not be
required for excluded actions.
Determination. The responsible
official shall determine whether an
action Is eligible for a categorical ex-
clusion as established by general crite-
ria In 16.107 and any appli-
cable criteria In program specific sub-
parts of part 8 of this title. A determi-
nation shall be made as early as possi-
ble following the receipt of an applica-
tion. The responsible official shall doc-
ument the decision to Issue or deny an
exclusion as soon as practicable f ollow-
J 4.107
Ing review In accordance with
|8.«0(f>. For qualified actions, the
documentation shall Include the appli-
cation, a brief description of the pro-
posed action, and a brief statement of
how the action meets the criteria for a
categorical exclusion without violating
criteria for not granting an exclusion.
(c) Revocation. The responsible offi-
cial shall revoke a categorical exclu-
sion and shall require a full environ-
mental review If. subsequent to the
granting of an exclusion, the responsi-
ble official determines that: (1) The
proposed action no longer meets the
requirements for a categorical exclu-
sion due to 'changes In the proposed
action; or (3) determines from new evi-
dence that serious local or environ-
mental Issues exist: or (3) that Feder-
al. State, local, or tribal laws are being
-or may be violated.
Notwithstanding the provisions
of paragraph (d) of this section. If any
of the conditions cited In paragraph
«e«l) of this section exist, the respon-
sible official shall ensure:
(I) That a categorical exclusion Is
not granted or. If previously granted.
that It Is revoked according to para-
graph (e) of this section:
III) That an adequate EID Is pre-
pared; and
HID'That either an environmental
assessment and FNSI or a notice of
Intent for an EI8 and ROD Is pre-
pared and Issued.
The Federal action may signifi-
cantly affect the pattern and type of
land use (Industrial, commercial, agri-
cultural, recreational, residential) or
growth and distribution of population;
The effects resulting from any
structure or facility constructed or op-
erated under the proposed action may
conflict with local, regional or Stale
land use plans or policies;
lc) The proposed action may have
significant adverse effects on wet-
lands. Including Indirect and cumula-
tive effects, or any major part of a
structure or facility constructed or op-
erated under the proposed action may
be located In wetlands:
id) The proposed action may signifi-
cantly affect threatened and endan-
gered species or their habitats Identi-
fied In the Department of the Interi-
or's list. In accordance with 18.302, or
a State's list, or a structure or a faclll
ty constructed or operated under the
proposed action may be located In the
habitat:
(e) Implementation of the proposed
action or plan may directly cause or
Induce changes that significantly:
(1 > Displace population;
-------
(9) Alter the character of existing
residential areas;
(3) Adversely affect a floodplaln; or
14) Adversely affect significant
amounts of Important farmlands as
defined In requirements In |a.30ttc).
or agricultural operations on this land.
(f) The proposed action may. direct-
ly. Indirectly or cumulatively have sig-
nificant adverse effect on parklands.
preserves, other public lands or areas
of recognized scenic, recreational, ar-
chaeological, or historic value; or
(g) The Federal action-may directly
or through Induced development have
a significant adverse effect upon local
ambient air quality, local ambient
noise levels, surface water or ground-
water quality or quantity, water
supply, fish, shellfish, wildlife, and
their natural habitats.
ISO PR MI». June IS. 1985. w mended at
61 PR «M11. Sept. 11.1888)
Ot.no The emrlraMBMlal
oftJSs
Impart state-
_ Prepare of EISs must conform
V with the requirements of 40 CPR part
O\ 1W>2 In writing EISs.
81201 format.
The format used for EISs shall en-
courage good analysis and clear pres-
entation of alternatives. Including the
proposed action, and their environ-
mental, economic and social Impacts.
The following standard format for
EISs should be used unless the respon-
sible official determines that there Is a
compelling reason to do otherwise:
(a) Cover sheet;
(b> Executive Summary;
fc) Table of contents;
(d) Purpose of and need for action;
(e) Alternatives Including proposed
action;
(f) Affected environment:
(g) Environmental consequences of
the alternatives;
mmenl has resulted In a change In
40 CM Ch. I (7-141 tdMon)
the project or the EIS. the Impact
statement should explain the reason.
(2) Public participation through
public hearings or scoping meetings
shall also be Included. If a public hear-
ing has been held prior to the publica-
tion of the EIS. a summary of the
transcript should be Included In this
section. For the public hearing which
shall be held after the publication of
the draft EIS. the date. time, place.
and purpose shall be Included here.
(3) In the final EIS. a summary of
the coordination process and EPA re-
sponses to comments on the draft EIS
shall be Included.
144 PR Mm. No*. 8.18T8. at amended it SO
PR 28318. June 28.108S)
V.Z04 lncof poi*tttlon oy ttici*ciicc>
In addition to 40 CPR 1502.21. mate-
rial Incorporated Into an EIS by refer-
ence shall be organized to the extent
possible Into a Supplemental Informa-
tion Document and be made available
for review upon request. No material
may be Incorporated by reference
unless It Is reasonably available for In-
spection by potentially Interested per-
sons within the period allowed for
comment.
(8.205 IJilofpnpanni.
When the EIS Is prepared by con-
tract, either under direct contract to
EPA or through an applicant's or
grantee's contractor, the responsible
official must Independently evaluate
the EIS prior to Its approval and take
responsibility for Its scope and con-
tents. The EPA officials who under-
take this evaluation shall also be de-
scribed under the list of preparers.
Sobport CCoordination Wlm OHwr
kjUHwHOfl KvtifUlfv)IH4M1H
18.300 General.
Various Federal laws and executive
orders address specific environmental
concerns. The responsible official shall
Integrate to the greatest practicable
extent the applicable procedures In
this subpart during the Implementa-
tion of the environmental review proc-
ess under Subparts E throuich I. This
-------
subpart presents the central require-
menu of these laws and executive
orders. It refers to the pertinent au-
thority and regulations or guidance
that contain the procedures. These
laws and executive orders establish
review procedures Independent of
NEPA requirements. The responsible
official shall be familiar with any
other EPA or appropriate agency pro-
cedures Implementing these laws and
executive orders.
141 PR MITI. No*. 6. im. u amended at 60
PR M316. June U. 18861
UOI
EPA Is subject to the requirements
of the Historic Biles Act of 1935. 16
VAC. 461 el sea. the National Histor-
ic Preservation Act of 1968. as amend-
ed. 16 VAC. 470 et teg., the Archae-
ological and Historic Preservation Act
of 1974.16 VAC. 469 et teg., and Exec-
utive Order 11693. entitled "Protection
and Enhancement of the Cultural En-
vironment" These statutes, regula-
tions and executive orders establish
review procedures Independent of
NEPA requirements.
(a) National natural landmark*.
Under the Historic Sites Act of 1935.
the Secretary of the Interior Is au-
thorized to designate areas as national
natural landmarks for listing on the
National Registry of Natural Land-
marks. In conducting an environmen-
tal review of a proposed EPA action.
the responsible official shall consider
the existence and location of natural
landmarks using Information provided
by the National Park Service pursuant
to 36 CPR ea.«d> to avoid undesirable
Impacts upon such landmarks.
(bl Historic. arcMtecftiraf. arclkeo-
loptoal and cultural tiles. Under sec-
tion 106 of the National Historic Pres-
ervation Act and Executive Order
11593. If an EPA undertaking affects
any property with historic, architec-
tural, archeologlcal or cultural value
that Is listed on or eligible for listing
on the National Register of Historic
Places, the responsible official shall
comply with the procedures for con-
sultation and comment promulgated
by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation In 36 CPR part 600. The
responsible official must Identify prop-
96402
ertles affected by the undertaking
that are potentially eligible for listing
on the National Register and shall re-
quest a determination of eligibility
from the Keeper of the National Reg-
ister. Department of the Interior.
under the procedures In 38 CPR part
83.
Historic, prehistoric and arcfteo-
loffieal data. Under the Archeologlcal
and Historic Preservation Act. If an
EPA activity may cause Irreparable
loss or destruction of significant scien-
tific, prehistoric, historic or archeolog-
lcal data, the responsible official or
the Secretary of the Interior Is au-
thorised to undertake data recovery
and preservation activities. Data recov-
ery and preservation activities shall be
conducted In accordance with Imple-
menting procedures promulgated by
the Secretary of the Interior. The Na-
tional Park Service has published
technical standards and guidelines re-
garding archeologlcal preservation ac-
tivities and methods at 48 PR 44116
(September 29.19831.
[44 PR 64171. Ho*.«. 197*. a* amended at 60
PR M3I6. June ». IMS!
BUM Wetlands, floodplami. impartial
scenic riven, flih and wildlife, and «n-
daniertd species.
The following procedures shall apply
to EPA administrative actions In pro-
grams to which the pertinent statute
or executive order applies.
(a) Wetlands protection. Executive
Order 11990. Protection of Wetlands.
requires Federal agencies conducting
certain activities to avoid, to the
extent possible, the adverse Impacts
associated with the destruction or loss
of wetlands and to avoid support of
new construction In wetlands If a prac-
ticable alternative exists. EPA's State-
ment of Procedures on Floodplaln
Management and Wetlands Protection
(dated January 5. 1979. Incorporated
as Appendix A hereto) requires EPA
programs to determine If proposed ac-
tions will be In or will affect wetlands.
If so. the responsible official shall pre-
pare a floodplalns/wetlands assess-
ment, which will be part of the envi-
ronmental assessment or environmen-
tal Impact statement. The responsible
official shall either avoid adverse Im-
pacts or minimize them If no practica-
ble alternative to the action exists.
(b) floodplain management. Execu-
tive Order 11988. Floodplaln Manage-
ment, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate the potential effects of ac-
tions they may take In a floodplaln to
avoid, to the extent possible, advene
effects associated with direct and Indi-
rect development of a floodplaln.
EPA's Statement of Procedures on
Floodplaln Management and Wetlands
Protection (dated January 5. 1979. In-
corporated as Appendix A hereto), re-
quires EPA programs to determine
whether an action will be located In or
will affect a floodplaln. If so. the re-
sponsible official shall prepare a flood-
plaln/wetlands assessment. The as-
sessment will become part of the envi-
ronmental assessment or environmen-
tal Impact statement. The responsible
official shall either avoid, adverse Im-
pacts or minimize them If no practica-
ble alternative exists.
Important /armland*. It Is EPA's
policy as stated In the EPA Policy To
Protect Environmentally Significant
Agricultural Lands, dated September
8. 1978, to consider the protection of
the Nation's significant/Important ag-
ricultural lands from Irreversible con-
version to uses which result In Its loss
as an environmental or essential food
production resource. In addition the
Farmland Protection Policy Act.
(FPPA) 7 VAC. 4201 et tea., requires
federal agencies to use criteria devel-
oped by the Boll Conservation Service.
U A Department of Agriculture. UK
(I) Identify and take Into account
the adverse effects of their programs
on the preservation of farmlands from
conversion to other uses; (2) consider
alternative actions, as appropriate.
that could lessen such advene Im-
pacts; and (3) assure that their pro-
grams, to the extent possible, are com-
patible with State and local govern-
ment and private programs and poli-
cies to protect farmlands. If an EPA
action may adversely Impact farm-
lands which are classified prune.
unique or of State and local Impor-
tance as defined In the Act. the re-
sponsible official shall In all cases
apply the evaluative criteria promul-
gated by the VA Department of Agrl-
40 CFI Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
culture at 7 CFR part 658. If catego-
ries of Important farmlands, which In-
clude those defined in both the FPPA
and the EPA policy, are Identified In
the project study area, both direct and
Indirect effects of the undertaking on
the remaining farms and farm support
services within the project area and
Immediate environs shall be evaluated.
Adverse effects shall be avoided or
mitigated to the extent possible.
Coastal gone managrmtni. The
Coastal Zone Management Act. 16
U.S.C. 1451 et sea., requires that all
Federal activities In coastal areas be
consistent with approved State Coast-
al Zone Management Programs, to the
maximum extent possible. If an EPA
action may affect a coastal tone area.
the responsible official shall assess the
Impact of the action on the coastal
zone. If the action significantly affects
the coastal zone area and the Stale
has an approved coastal tone manage-
ment program, a consistency determi-
nation shall be sought In accordance
with procedures promulgated by the
Office of Coastal Zone Management In
15 CFR part 930.
(e) Wild and scenic rivers. II) The
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 16 VAC.
1274 et sea., establishes requirements
applicable to water resource projects
affecting wild, scenic or recreational
riven within the National Wild and
Scenic Riven system as well as riven
designated on the National Riven In-
ventory to be studied for Inclusion In
the national system. Under the Act. a
federal agency may not assist, through
grant, loan, license or otherwise, the
construction of a water resources
project that would have a direct and
advene effect on the values for which
a river In the National System or
study river on the National Riven In-
ventory was established, as determined
by the Secretary of the Interior for
riven under the Jurisdiction of the De-
partment of the Interior and by the
Secretary of Agriculture for riven
under the Jurisdiction of the Depart-
ment of Agriculture. Nothing con-
tained In the foregoing sentence, how-
ever, shall:
(I) Preclude licensing of. or assist-
ance to. developments below or above
a wild, scenic or recreational river area
or on any stream tributary thereto
-------
oo
which will not Invade the area or un-
reasonably diminish the scenic, recre-
ational, and ftoh and wildlife values
present In the area on October 3. 1968;
or
(II) Preclude licensing of. or assist-
ance to. developments below or above
a study river'or any stream tributary
thereto which will not Invade'the area
or diminish the scenic, recreational
and ftoh and wildlife values present In
the area on October 3.1968.
(3) The responsible official shall:
(I) Determine whether there are any
wild, scenic or study riven on the Na-
tional Riven Inventory or In the plan-
ning area, and
(II) Not recommend authorization of
any water resources project that
would have a direct and adverse effect
on the values for which such river was
established, as determined by the ad-
ministering Secretary In request of ap-
propriations to begin construction of
any such project, whether heretofore
or hereafter authorized, without advis-
ing the administering Secretary. In
writing of this Intention at least sixty
days In advance, and without specifi-
cally reporting to the Congress-ln writ-
Ing at the tune the recommendation or
request to made In what respect con-
struction of such project would be In
conflict with the purposes of the Wild
and Scenic Riven Act and would
affect the component and the values
to be protected by the Responsible Of-
ficial under the Act.
(3) Applicable consultation require-
ments are found In section 7 of the
Act. The Department of Agriculture
has promulgated Implementing proce-
dures. under section 7 at 36 CFR part
397. which apply to water resource
projects located within, above, below
or outside a wild and scenic river or
study river under the Department's Ju-
risdiction.
(f) Barrier Islands. The Coastal Bar-
rier Resources Act. 16 U.8.C. 3501 et
teg., generally prohibits new federal
expenditures or financial assistance
for any purpose within Che Coastal
Barrier Resources System on or after
October 18. 1983. Specified exceptions
to this prohibition are allowed only
after consultation with the Secretary
of 'nterior. The responsible offl-
el ensure that consultation to
carried out with the Secretary of the
Interior before making available new
expenditures or financial assistance
for activities within areas covered by
the Coastal Barriers Resources Act In
accord with the VS. Fish and Wildlife
Service published guidelines defining
new expenditures and financial assist-
ance, and describing procedures for
consultation at 48 PR 45664 (October
6.1983).
(g) FUh and wildlife protection. The
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. 16
U.8.C. 861 et tea., requires Federal
agencies Involved in actions that will
result In the control or structural
modification of any natural stream or
body of water for any purpose, to take
action to protect the fish and wildlife
resources which may be affected by
the action. The responsible official
shall consult with the Fish and Wild-
life Service and the appropriate State
agency to ascertain the means and
measures. necessary to mitigate, pre-
vent and compensate for project-relat-
ed losses of wildlife resources and to
enhance the resources. Reports and
recommendations of wildlife agencies
should be Incorporated Into the envl-
fonmcnuii lintiPBriHUpnt OF cnvlroiuiicn*
tal Impact statement. Consultation
procedures are detailed In 16 U.8.C.
663.
(h) Endangered specie* protection.
Under the Endangered Species Act. 16
UJ8.C. 1831 ef teg.. Federal agencies
are prohibited from Jeopardising
threatened or endangered species or
adversely modifying habitats essential
to their survival. The responsible offi-
cial shall Identify all designated en-
dangered or threatened species or
their habitat that may be affected by
an EPA action. It listed species or
their habitat may be affected, formal
consultation must be undertaken with
the Fish and Wildlife Service or the
National Marine Fisheries Service, as
appropriate. If the consultation re-
veals that the EPA activity may Jeop-
ardize a listed species or habitat, miti-
gation measures should be considered.
Applicable consultation procedures are
found In SO CFR part 403.
144 PR Mill. Nov. 6. l»l». u amended at 50
PR J8JI8. June M. 19851
6.303
SUM Air quality.
la) The Clean Air Act. as amended In
1971. 43 U.8.C. 7476(0. requires all
Federal .projects, licenses, permits.
plans, and financial assistance activi-
ties to conform to any State Air Qual-
ity Implementation Plan (SIP) ap-
proved or promulgated under section
110 of the Act. For proposed EPA ac-
tions that may significantly affect air
quality, the responsible official shall
assess the extent of the direct or Indi-
rect Increases In emissions and the re-
sultant change In air quality.
(b) If the proposed action may have
a significant direct or Indirect adverse
effect on air quality, the responsible
official shall consult with the appro-
priate State and local agencies as to
the conformity of the proposed action
with the SIP. Such agencies shall In-
clude the State agency with primary
responsibility for the SIP. the agency
designated under section 174 of the
Clean Air Act and. where appropriate.
the metropolitan planning organiza-
tion (MPO). This consultation should
Include a request for a recommenda-
tion as to the conformity of the pro-
posed action with the SIP.
(c) The responsible official shall pro-
vide an assurance In the FN8I or the
draft EI8 that the proposed action
conforms with the SIP.
(d) The assurance of conformity
shall be based on a determination of
the following:
(1) The proposed action will be In
compliance with all applicable Federal
and State air pollution emission limi-
tations and standards:
(3) The direct and Indirect air pollu-
tion emissions resulting from the pro-
posed action have been expressly
quantified In the emissions growth al-
lowance of the SIP: or If a case-by-case
offset approach to Included In the SIP.
that offsets have been obtained for
the proposed action's air quality Im-
pacts:
(3) The proposed action conforms to
the SIPS provisions for demonstrating
reasonable further progress toward at-
tainment of the national ambient air
quality standards by the required
date;
(4) The proposed action compiles
-h all other provisions and require-
s of the SIP.
- 40 CM Cn. I (7-1-91 Edition)
(e) During the 30-day FNSI and 43-
day draft BIS review time periods EPA
shall provide an opportunity for the
State agency with primary responsibil-
ity for the SIP to concur or nonconcur
with the determination of conformity.
All State notifications of concurrence
or nonconcurrence with the EPA con-
formity determination shall Include a
record of consultation with the appro-
priate section 174 agency and. where
different, the MPO. There shall be a
presumption of State concurrence If
no objection to received by EPA during
the review time period.
(f) The responsible official shall pro-
vide In the FNSI or the final EI8 a re-
sponse to a notification of slate non-
concurrence with the EPA conformity
determination. This response shall In-
clude the baste by which the conformi-
ty of the proposed action to the SIP
will be assured. If the responsible offi-
cial finds that the State nonconcur-
rence with the EPA conformity deter-
mination to unjustified, then an expla-
nation of this finding shall be Included
In the FNSI or the final EIS...
(g) With regard to wastewater treat-
ment works subject to review under
Subpart E of this part, the responsible
official shall consider the air pollution
control requirement* specified In sec-
tion 316tb) of the Clean Air Act. 42
, U.8.C. 7616. and Agency Implementing
procedures.
(44 PR 64177. Nov. 6.197*. u Minuted at SO
PR 18117. June M. I9SS)
Support 0PokBe and Other federal
96,400 Public Involvement
(a) General. EPA shall make diligent
efforts to Involve the public In the en-
vironmental review process consistent
with program regulations and EPA
policies on public participation. The
responslblle official shall ensure that
public notice to provided for In accord-
ance with 40 CFR 1506.6(b) and shall
ensure that public Involvement la car-
ried out In accordance with EPA
Public Participation Regulations. 40
CFR part 35. and other applicable
EPA public participation procedures.
(b> PuMlcafion of notices of Intent
As soon as practicable after his decl-
-------
Ion to prepare an BIS and before the
coping process, the responsible offi-
cial shall send the notice of Intent to
Interested and affected members of
the public and shall request the OEA
to publish the notice of Intent In the
FBMKAL Rmsm. The responsible of-
ficial shall send to OEA the stoned
original notice of Intent for FEDERAL
Rnisra publication purposes. The
coping process should be Initiated as
soon as practicable In accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 1501.7.
ParUdpanta bi the scoping process
shall be kept Informed of substantial
changes which evolve during the EI8
drafting process,
(e> Public meeting* or hearing*.
Public meetings or hearings shall be
conducted consistent with Agency pro-
gram requirement*. There shall be a
presumption that a scoping meeting
will be conducted whenever a notice of
Intent has been published. The re-
sponsible official shall conduct a
public hearing on & draft £38. The re-
sponsible official shall ensure that the
draft EI8 Is made available to the
public at least 90 days In advance of
the hearing.
Id) nnding* of no tigniflcant
impact trNSI). The responsible offi-
cial shall allow for sufficient public
review of a PNSI before It becomes ef-
fective. The PN8I and attendant pub-
lication must state that Interested per-
sons disagreeing with the decision may
submit comment* to EPA. The respon-
sible official shall not take administra-
tive action on the project for at least
thirty <30> calendar days after release
of the FN8I and may allow more time
for response. The responsible official
shall consider, fully, comments sub-
mitted on the PNSI before taking ad-
ministrative action. The PNSI shall be
made available to the public hi accord-
ance with the requirements and all ap-
propriate recommendations contained
In 11506.0 of this title.
(e> Record of Decision (ROB). The
responsible official shall disseminate
the ROD to those parties which com-
mented on the draft or final EI8.
(I) Categorical exclusion*, lit For
categorical exclusion determinations
under subpart E < Waste water Treat-
ment Construction Grants Program).
an applicant who files for and receives
96.401
a determination of categorical exclu-
sion under 16.101(8). or has one re-
scinded under |6.107(c>. shall publish
a notice Indicating the determination
of eligibility or rescission In a local
newspaper of community-wide circula-
tion and Indicate the availability of
the supporting documentation for
public Inspection. The responsible offi-
cial shall, concurrent with the publica-
tion of the notice, make the documen-
tation as outlined In 18.107(b> avail-
able to the public and distribute the
notice of the determination to all
known Interested parties.
(3) For categorical exclusion deter-
minations under other subparta of thb
regulation, no public notice need be
Issued; however. Information regard-
Ing these determinations may be ob-
tained by contacting the U A Environ-
mental Protection Agency's Office of
Research Program Management for
ORD actions, or the Office of Federal
Activities for other program actions.
114 PR 64177. Nov. 6. 1919. M amended at BI
PR 3MI1. Sept. IS. IBM: 66 PR MM3. Hay
6.19911
16.461 Official filing requirement*.
(a) General OEA Is responsible for
the conduct of the official filing
system for EISs. This system was es-
tablished as a central repository for all
EISs which serves not only as means
of advising the public of the availabil-
ity of each EI8 but provides a uniform
method for the computation of mini-
mum time periods for the review of
EISs. OEA publishes a weekly notice
In the FEDERAL Rmsm listing all
EISs received during a given week.
The 45-day and 30-day review periods
for draft and final EISs. respectively.
are computed from the Friday follow-
ing a given reporting week. Pursuant
to 40 CPR 1506.0. responsible officials
shall comply with the guidelines estab-
lished by OEA on the conduct of the
filing system.
(b) Minimum time period!. No deci-
sion on EPA actions of this part
from which the draft EIS review time
period Is computed.
IMOI
(2) Thirty (30) days after the date
established In 16.401(a> of this part
from which the final E18 review time
period Is computed.
(c> Filing of EIS*. All EISs. Including
supplements, must be officially filed
with OEA. Responsible officials shall
transmit each EIS In five (5) copies to
the Director. Office of Environmental
Review. EIS Filing Section (A-104).
OEA will provide CEQ with one copy
of each EIS Hied. No EIS will be offi-
cially filed by OER unless the EIS has
been made available to the public.
OEA will not accept unbound copies of
EISs for tiling.
. with-
out regard to the exclusion for Inter-
agency memoranda where such memo-
randa transmit comments of Federal
agencies on the environmental Impact
of the proposed actions. To the extent
practicable, materials made available
to the public shall be provided without
charge; otherwise, a fee may be Im-
posed which Is not more than, the
actual cost of reproducing copies re-
quired to be sent to another Federal
agency.
(b) Public information. Lists of all
notices, determinations and other re-
ports/documentation, related to these
notices and determinations. Involving
CEs. EAs. FNSIs. notices of Intent.
EISs. and RODs prepared by EPA
shall be available for public Inspection
and maintained by the responsible of-
ficial as a monthly status report. OEA
shall maintain a comprehensive list of
notices of Intent and draft, and final
EISs provided by all responsible offi-
cials for public Inspection Including
publication In the FEDERAL REGISTER.
In addition. OEA will make copies of
all EPA-prepared EISs available for
public Inspection: the responsible offi-
cial shall do the same for any EIS he/
she undertakes.
Ml FR Mill. Ho*. 6.1919. u amended at 51
FR 32611. Sept. IS. IMS]
66.403 The<
"I I"
(a) Inviting commend. After prepar-
ing a draft EIS and before preparing a
final EIS. the responsible official shall
obtain the comments of Federal agen-
cies, other governmental entitles and
the public In accordance with 40 CPR
1503.1.
(b) Retpense to comment*. The re-
sponsible official shall respond to com-
ments In the final EIS In accordance
with 40 CFR 1503.4.
(a) General The responsible official
shall consider preparing supplements
to draft and final EISs In accordance
with 40 CFR 1502.9(0. A supplement
shall be prepared, circulated and filed
-------
In the same fashion (exclusive of scop-
ing) as draft and final ElSa.
(b) Alternative procedure*. In the
case where the responsible official
wants to deviate from existing proce-
dures. OEA shall be consulted. OEA
shall consult with CEQ on any alter-
native arrangements.
144 FR MITT. Nov. t. IMS. as amended at 41
PR MM. Mw. 8. IMS]
BODICE M PR Mill. June M. 1986. unlMS
Dthenrtae noted.
This subpart amplifies the proce-
dures described In subparts A through
D with detailed environmental review
procedures for the Municipal
Wastewater Treatment Works Con-
struction Grants Program under Title
II of the Clean Water Act.
U IUOI Definition*.
*-> (a) Step 1 faeilitiei planning means
O preparation of a plan for facilities as
described In 40 CPR part 35. subpart E
or I.
Step 2 means a project to prepare
design drawings and specifications as
described In 40 CPR part 35. subpart E
or I.
(c) Step J means a project to build a
publicly owned treatment works as de-
scribed In 40 CFR part 36. subpart E
or I.
(d) Step *+3 means a project which
combines preparation of design draw-
Ings and specifications as described In
16.50Kb) and building as described In
I6.50KO.
(e) Applicant means any Individual.
agency, or entity which has filed an
application for grant assistance under
40 CFR part 36. subpart E or I.
-------
traction Grant Amendments of 1981
(40 CFB put 35. subpart I).
(b) Protect* receiving Step 1 grant
assistance on or before December 19.
1911. (1) During faculties planning.
the grantee shall evaluate project al-
ternatives and the existence of envi-
ronmentally Important resource areas
Including those Identified In 16.108
and 18.609 of this subpart. and poten-
tial for open space and recreation op-
portunities In the facilities planning
area. This evaluation Is Intended to be
brief and concise and should draw on
exuitlng Information from EPA. State
agencies, regional planning agencies.
areawlde water quality management
agencies, and the Step 1 grantee. The
Step 1 grantee should submit this In-
formation to EPA or a delegated State
at the earliest possible time during fa-
cilities planning to allow EPA to deter-
mine If the action Is eligible for a cate-
gorical exclusion. The evaluation and
any additional analysis deemed neces-
sary by the responsible official may be
used by EPA to determine whether
the action Is ejlglble for a categorical
exclusion from the substantive envi-
ronmental review requirements of this
part If a categorical exclusion Is
granted, the grantee will not be re-
quired to prepare a formal BID nor
will the responsible official be re-
quired to prepare an environmental
assessment under NEPA. If an action
Is not granted a categorical exclusion.
this evaluation may be used to deter-
mine the scope of the BID required of
the grantee. This Information can also
be used to make an early determina-
tion of the need for partitioning the
environmental review or for an E18.
Whenever possible, the Step 1 grantee
should discuss this Initial evaluation
with both the delegated State and
EPA.
(9) A review of environmental Infor-
mation developed by the grantee
should be conducted by the responsi-
ble official whenever meetings are
held to assess the progress of facilities
plan development. These meetings
should be held after completion of the
majority of the BID document and
before a preferred alternative Is select-
ed. Since any required EI8 must be
completed before the approval of a fa-
cilities plan, a decision whether to pre-
SIMS
pare an BIS to encouraged early
during the faculties planning process.
These meetings may assist In this
early determination. EPA should
Inform Interested parties of the fol-
fl) The preliminary nature of the
Agency's position on preparing an BIS;
(II) The relationship between the fa-
cilities planning and environmental
(III) The desirability of public Input:
and
(Iv) A contact person for further In-
formation.
(c) Projects not receiving grant as-
sistance for Step i faciHtie$ planning
on or before December 29. 1911.. Poten-
tial Step 3 or Step 9+3 grant appli-
cants should. In accordance with
1 38.M30CO. consult with EPA and the
State early In the facilities planning
process to determine the appropriate-
ness of a categorical exclusion, the
scope of an EID. or the appropriate-
ness of the early preparation of an en-
vironmental assessment or an BIS.
The consultation would be most useful
during the evaluation of project alter-
natives prior to the selection of pre-
ferred alternative to assist In resolving
any Identified environmental prob-
. (a) General At the request of an ex-
isting Step 1 faculties planning grant-
ee or of a potential Step 3 or Step 8+3
grant applicant, the responsible offi-
cial, as provided for In ||8.107(b>.
8.40Mf> and 0.604(a). shall determine
from existing Information and docu-
ment whether an action Is consistent
with the categories eligible for exclu-
sion from NEPA review Identified In
|8.101(d) or |8.608(b) and not Incon-
sistent with the criteria In 18.IOT(e) or
18.806(0.
(b) Specialised catcgoriet of action*
eligible JOT exclusion. For this subpart,
eligible actions consist of any of the
categories In 18.l07(d). on
(1) Actions for which the facilities
planning to consistent with the catego-
ry listed In |8.107(dxl) which do not
affect the degree of treatment or ca-
pacity of the existing facility Includ-
ing, but not limited to. Infiltration and
Inflow corrections, grant-eligible re-
placement of existing mechanical
equipment or structures, and the con-
struction of small structures on exist-
ing sites;
(9) Actions In sewered communities
of less than 10.000 persons which are
for minor upgrading and minor expan-
sion of existing treatment works. This
category does not Include actions that
directly or Indirectly Involve the ex-
tension of new collection systems
funded with federal or other sources
of funds:
(3) Actions In unsewered communi-
ties of less than 10.000 persons where
on-slte technologies are proposed: or
(4) Other actions are developed In
accordance wllh 18.107IO.
(c) Specialised Criteria for not
granting a categorical exclusion. (1)
The full environmental review proce-
dures of this part must be followed If
undertaking an action consistent with
the categories described In paragraph
(b) of this section meets any of the cri-
teria listed In | e.lOI(e) or when:
(I) The facilities to be provided will
(A) create a new. or (B) relocate an ex-
isting, discharge to surface or ground
waters:
(II) The facilities will result In sub-
stantial Increases In the volume of dis-
charge or the loading of pollutants
from an existing source or from new
facilities to receiving waters; or
(III) The facilities would provide ca-
pacity to serve a population 30% great-
er than the existing population.
(d) Proceeding with front award*.
(1) After a categorical exclusion on a
proposed treatment works has been
granted, and notices published In ac-
cordance with |6.400(f>. grant awards
may proceed without being subject to
any further environmental review re-
quirements under this part, unless the
responsible official later determines
that the project, or the conditions at
the time the categorical determination
was made, have changed significantly
since the Independent EPA review of
Information submitted by the grantee
In support of the exclusion.
(3) For all categorical exclusion de-
terminations:
(I) That are five or more years old on
projects awaiting Step 9+3 or Step 3
grant funding, the responsible official
40 CHI Ch. I (7-1-91 edition)
shall re-evaluate the project, environ-
mental conditions and public views
and. prior to grant award, either:
(A) ReaffirmIssue a public notice
reaffirming EPA's decision to proceed
with the project without need for any
further environmental review;
(B) Supplementupdate the Infor-
mation In the decision document on
the categorically excluded project and
prepare. Issue, and distribute a revised
notice In accordance with 16.107(1); or
(C) Reassessrevoke the categorical
exclusion In accordance with 16.107(c)
and require a complete environmental
review to determine the need for an
BIS In accordance with 18.806. fol-
lowed by preparation. Issuance and
distribution of an EA/FN8I or BIS/
ROD.
(II) That are made on projects that
have been awarded a Step 9+3 grant.
the responsible official shall, at the
time of plans and specifications review
under 13S.3209(b) of this title, assess
whether the environmental conditions.
or the project's anticipated Impact on
the environment have changed and.
prior to plans and specifications ap-
proval, advise the Regional Adminis-
trator If additional environmental
review Is necessary.
ISO PR 26317. June SS. 1SBB. a* amended at
SI PR 1MII. Sept. II. 1SSSI
06.S06 En*bonnwnUI rnicw proceu.
(a) Review of completed /acuities
plans. The responsible official shall
ensure a review of the completed fa-
cilities plan with particular attention
to the EID and Its utilization In the
development of alternatives and the
selection of a preferred alternative. An
adequate EID shall be an Integral part
of any facilities plan submitted to EPA
or to a State. The EID shall be of suf-
ficient scope to enable the responsible
official to make determinations on re-
quests for partitioning the environ-
mental review process In accordance
with 16.607 and for preparing environ-
mental assessments In accordance with
16.506(0).
(b) environmental atieitmenL The
environmental assessment process
shall cover all potentially significant
environmental Impacts. The responsi-
ble official shall prepare a preliminary
-------
environmental Muniment on which to
FNSI. For those States delegated envi-
ronmental
16.614. the State responsible of-
ficial shall prepare the preliminary en-
vironmental assessment In sufficient
detail to serve as an adequate basis for
EPA's Independent NEPA review and
decision to finalise and Issue an envi-
ronmental assessment/FNSI or to pre-
pare and Issue a notice of Intent for an
E38/ROD. The EPA also may require
submission of supplementary Informa-
tion before the facilities plan Is ap-
proved If needed for Its Independent
review of the State's preliminary as-
sessment for compliance with environ-
mental review requirements. Substan-
tial requests for supplementary Infor-
mation by EPA. Ineludlnt the review
of the facilities plan, shall be made In
writing. Each of the following subjects
outlined below, and requirements of
subpart C of this part, shall be re-
viewed by the responsible official to
Identify potentially significant envi-
ronmental concerns and their associat-
ed potential Impacts, and the responsi-
ble official shall furthermore address
these concerns and Impacts In the en-
vironmental assessment:
(I) Description of the extofin* envi-
ronment For the delineated facilities
planning area, the existing environ-
mental conditions relevant to the anal-
ysis of alternatives, or to determining
the environmental Impacts of the pro-
posed action, shall be considered.
<2> Description of Uie future environ-
ment without the project. The relevant
future environmental conditions shall
be described. The no action alternative
should be discussed.
(3) Purpote and need. This should
Include a summary discussion and
demonstration of the need, or absence
of need, for wastewater treatment In
the faculties planning area, with par-
ticular emphasis on existing public,
health or water quality problems and
their severity and extent
(41 Documentation. Citations to In-
formation used to describe the exist-
ing environment and to assess future
-onmental Impacts should be
referenced and documented.
sources should Include, as ap-
pronriate but not limited to. local.
tribal, regional. State, and federal
agencies as well as public and private
organizations and Institutions with re-
sponsibility or Interest In the types of
conditions listed In 16.600 and In sub-
part C of this part.
(6) AnalvH* of alternative*. This dis-
cussion shall Include a comparative
analysis of feasible alternatives. In-
cluding the no action alternative.
throughout the study area. The alter-
natives shall be screened with respect
to capital and operating costs; direct.
Indirect, and cumulative environmen-
tal effects; physical, legal, or Institu-
tional constraints: and compliance
with regulatory requirements. Special
attention should given to: the environ-
mental consequences of long-term. Ir-
reversible, and Induced Impacts: and
for projects Initiated after September
36. 1878. that grant applicants have
satisfactorily demonstrated analysis of
potential recreation and open-space
opportunities In the planning of the
proposed treatment works. The rea-
sons for rejecting any alternatives
shall be presented In addition to any
significant environmental benefits pre-
cluded by rejection of an alternative.
The analysis should consider when rel-
evant to the project:
(I) Flow and waste reduction meas-
ures. Including Infiltration/Inflow re-
duction and pretreatment require-
ments:
III) Appropriate water conservation
(III) Alternative locations, capacities.
and construction phasing of facilities:
(Iv) Alternative waste management
techniques. Including pretreatment.
treatment and discharge, wasterwater
reuse, land application, and Individual
systems:
(v) Alternative methods for manage-
ment of sludge, other residual materi-
als. Including utilisation options such
as land application, composting, and
.conversion of sludge for marketing as
a soil conditioner or fertilizer
(vl> Improving effluent quality
through more efficient operation and
maintenance:
(vll) Appropriate energy reduction
measures: and
J6J07
(vlll) Multiple use Including recrea-
tion, other open space, and environ-
mental education.
(6) Evaluating environmental conte-
Queneei of proposed action. A full
range of relevant Impacts of the pro-
posed action shall be discussed. Includ-
ing measures to mitigate adverse Im-
pacts, any Irreversible or Irretrievable
commitments of resources to the
project and the relationship between
local short-term uses of the environ-
ment and the maintenance and en-
'hancement of long-term productivity.
Any specific requirements. Including
grant conditions and areawlde waste
treatment management plan require-
ments, should be Identified and refer-
enced. In addition to these Items, the
responsible official may require that
other analyses and data In accordance
with subpart C which are needed to
satisfy environmental review require-
ments be Included with the facilities
plan. Such requirements should be dis-
cussed whenever meetings are held
with Step 1 grantees or potential Step
3 or Step 3 -» 3 applicants.
(1) Minlmteina advene effect* of the
proposed action. (I) Structural and
nonstructural measures, directly or In-
directly related to the facilities plan.
to mitigate or eliminate adverse ef-
fects on' the human and natural envi-
ronments, shall be Identified during
the environmental review. Among
other measures, structual provisions
Include changes In facility design, sice.
and location: non-structural provisions
Include staging facilities, monitoring
and enforcement of environmental
regulations, and local commitments to
develop and enforce land use regula-
tions.
(II) The EPA shall not accept a fa-
cilities plan, nor award grant assist-
ance for Its Implementation. If the ap-
plicant/grantee has not made, or
agreed to make, changes In the
project. In accordance with determina-
tions made In a FNSI based on Its sup-
porting environmental assessment or
the ROD for a BIS. The EPA shall
condition a grant, or seek other-ways.
to ensure that the grantee will comply
'lli such environmental review deter-
istlons.
40 CM Oi. I (7-1-91 Edition)
(c> FNSf/EIS determination. The re-
sponsible official shall apply the crite-
ria under ( 6.806 to the following:
(DA complete facilities plan:
(2) The BID:
(3) The preliminary environmental
assessment: and
(4) Other documentation, deemed
necessary by. the responsible official
adequate to make an EIS determina-
tion by EPA. Where EPA determines
that an EIS Is to be prepared, there Is
no need to prepare a formal environ-
mental assessment. If EPA or the
State Identifies deficiencies In the
BID. preliminary environmental as-
sessment. or other supporting docu-
mentation. necessary corrections shall
be made to this documentation before
the conditions of the Step 1 grant are
considered satisfied or before the Step
3 or Step 2+3 application Is considered
complete. The responsible official's de-
termination to Issue a FNSI or to pre-
pare an EIS shall constitute final
Agency action, and shall not be sub-
ject to administrative review under 40
CFR part 30. subpart L.
ISO PR MJI7. June n. 1985. u amended >l
SI PR 3JSI1. Sept. IX IMSI
11.507 Partitioning Ihc cnvlronmcnUl
(a) Purpose. Under certain circum-
stances the building of a component/
portion of a wastewater treatment
system may be Justified In advance of
completing all NEPA requirements for
the remainder of the systenMs). When
there are overriding considerations of
cost or Impaired program ellectlve-
the responsible official may
award a construction grant, or approve
procurement by other than EPA
funds, for a discrete component of a
complete wastewater treatment
system(s). The process of partitioning
the environmental review for the dis-
crete component shall comply with
the criteria and procedures described
In paragraph (b) of this section. In ad-
dition, all reasonable alternatives for
the overall wastewater treatment
works system(s) of which the compo-
nent Is a part shall have been previ-
ously Identified, and each part of the
environmental review for the remain-
der of the overall facilities systems
-------
In the planning area In accordance
with 16.60a shall comply with all
requirement* under 16.806.
(b) Criteria for partitioning. (1)
Projects may be partitioned under the
following circumstances:
(II To overcome Impaired program
effectiveness, the project component,
In addition to meeting the criteria
listed In paragraph (bHJ) of this sec-
tion, must Immediately remedy a
severe public health, water quality or
other environmental problem; or
(II) To significantly reduce direct
costs on EPA projects, or other related
public works projects, the project com-
ponent (such as major pieces of equip-
ment, portions of conveyances or small
structures) In addition to meeting the
criteria listed In paragraph of
this section, must achieve a cost sav-
ings to the federal government and/or
to the grantee's or potential grantee's
overall costs Incurred In procuring the
wastewater treatment component^)
and/or the Installation of other relat-
ed public works projects funded In co-
ordination with other federal. State.
tribal or local agencies.
(1) The project component also
must:
(I) Not foreclose any reasonable al-
ternatives Identified for the overall
waatewater treatment works system(a);
(II) Not cause significant adverse
direct or Indirect environmental Im-
pacts Including those which cannot be
acceptably mitigated without complet-
ing the entire wastewater treatment
system of which the component Is a
part; and
(III) Not be highly controversial.
.
180 PR sniT. June IS. MSB. M mended at
61 PR IMIt, Sept IS. 1M6I
6 IMS Finding of No BlgBllleaat Impact
(FNBIK
(a) Criteria for producing and dto-
trtbuttng FNSIt. If. after completion
of the environmental review. EPA de-
termines that an EIS will not be re-
quired, the responsible official shall
Issue a FNSI In accordance with
II 6.108(1) and 6.4(XKd). The FNSI will
be based on EPA's Independent review
of the preliminary environmental as-
sessment and any other environmental
Information deemed necessary by the
responsible official consistent with the
requirements of |6.806(c). Following
the Agency's Independent review, the
environmental assessment will be fi-
nalized and either be Incorporated
Into, or attached to. the FNSI. The
FNSI shall list all mitigation measures
as defined In 11608.20 of this title, and
specifically Identify those mitigation
measures necessary to make the rec-
ommended alternative environmental-
ly acceptable.
(b) Proceeding with grant award*.
(I) Once an environmental assessment
has been prepared and the Issued
FNSI becomes effective for the treat-
ment works within the study area.
grant awards may proceed without
preparation of additional FNSIs.
unless the responsible official later de-
termines that the project or environ-
mental conditions have changed sig-
nificantly from that which underwent
environmental review.
(2) For all environmental assess-
ment/FNSI determinations:
(I) That are five or more yean old on
projects awaiting Step 2+3 or Step 3
grant funding, the responsible official
shall re-evaluate the project, environ-
|6JO*
mental conditions and public
and. prior to grant award, either
(A) JteoOflrm-lssue a public notice
reaffirming EPA's decision to proceed
with the project without revising the
environmental assessment;
(B) Supplementupdate Information
and prepare. Issue and distribute a re-
vised EA/PNSI In accordance with
II 6.166(1) and 6.4(KXd>: or
(C) JteoMCM-withdraw the PNSI
and publish a notice of Intent to
produce an EI8 followed by the prepa-
ration. Issuance and distribution of the
BIS/ROD.
(U) That are made on projects that
have been awarded a Step 8+3 grant.
the responsible official shall, at the
time of plans and specifications review
under 136.2302(b) of this title, assess
whether the environmental conditions
or the project's anticipated Impact on
the environment have changed and.
prior to plans and specifications ap-
proval, advise the Regional Adminis-
trator If additional environmental
40 CFt Ch. I (7-1-91 Ednlon)
181 PR 3J61J. Sept. I J. fatal
6J68 Criteria for InlUs
Ul Impact Statements (EI8).
(a) Condition* requiring gist. (1)
The responsible official shall assure
that an BIS will be prepared and
Issued when It Is determined that the
treatment works or collector system
will cause any of the conditions under
16.108 to exist, or when
(9) The treated effluent Is being dis-
charged Into a body of water where
the present clssslfleatlon Is too lenient
or Is being challenged as too low to
protect present or recent uses, and the
effluent will not be of sufficient qual-
ity or quantity to meet the require-
ments of these uses.
(b) Other condition*. The responsi-
ble official shall also consider prepar-
ing an EIS If: The project Is highly
controversial; the project In conjunc-
tion with related Federal. State, local
or tribal resource projects produces
significant cumulative Impacts; or If It
Is determined that the treatment
works may violate federal. State, local
or tribal laws or requirements Imposed
for the protection of the environment
6C6IO
(BIS) preparation.
(a) Slept in preparing fISt. In addi-
tion to the requirements specified In
subparts A. B. C. and D of this part,
the responsible official will conduct
the following activities:
(I) Notice of intent If a determina-
tion Is made that an EIS will be re-
quired, the responsible official shall
prepare and distribute a notice of
Intent as required In 16.10B(e) of this
part.
(» Scoping. As soon as possible,
after the publication of the notice of
Intent, the responsible official will
convene a meeting of affected federal.
State and local agencies, or affected
Indian tribes, the grantee and other
Interested parties to determine the
scope of the BIS. A notice of this scop-
Ing meeting must be 'made In accord-
ance with |6.400(a) and 40 CPR
1506.6(b>. As part of the scoping meet-
big EPA. In cooperation with any dele-
gated State, will as a minimum:
(I) Determine the significance of
Issues for and the scope of those sig-
nificant Issues to be analysed In depth.
In the EIS:
(II) Identify the preliminary range of
alternatives to be considered:
(III) Identify potential cooperating
agencies and determine the Informa-
tion or analyses that may be needed
from cooperating agencies or other
parties;
(Iv) Discuss the method for EIS
preparation and the public participa-
tion strategy:
(v) Identify consultation require-
ments of other environmental laws. In
accordance with subpart C; and
(vl) Determine the relationship be-
tween the EIS and the completion of
the facilities plan and any necessary
coordination arrangements between
the preparers of both documents.
(3) Identifying and evaluating alter-
native*. Immediately following the
scoping process, the responsible offi-
cial shall commence the Identification
and evaluation of all potentially viable
alternatives to adequately address the
range of Issues Identified In the scop-
Ing process. Additional Issues may be
addressed, or others eliminated.
-------
during this process and the reasons
documented as put of the OB.
(b) Melted* JOT preparing ZJSt,
After EPA determine* the need for ui
BOB. It hall Mlect one of the Iallowing
method! for Its preparation:
(1) Directly by EPA's own staff;
12) By EPA contracting directly with
ft Qualified eonniltlnt firm;
(9) By utHtadng ft third patty
method, whereby the responilble offi-
cial eaten Into "third party agree-
ments" for the appUcant to encage
and pay for the services of a third
party contractor to prepare the EIS.
Such agreement shall not be Initiated
unleu both Uie appllcaat and the re-
sponsible offlelal agree to Us creation.
A third party agreement win be estab-
lished prior to the applicant* BID and
eliminate the need for that document.
IB proceeding under the third party
agreement, the responsible official
shall carry out the following practices:
(1> In consultation with the appli-
cant, choose the third party contrac-
tor and manage that contract:
(II) Select the consultant based on
ability and an absence at conflict of In-
terest Third party contractors will be
required to execute a disclosure state-
ment prepared by the responsible offi-
cial signifying they have no financial
or other conflicting Interest In the
outcome of the project; and
fill) Specify the Information to be
developed and supervise the gatherng.
analysis and presentation of the infor-
mation. The responsible official shall
turn sole authority for approval and
modification of the statements, analy-
ses, and conclusions Included In the
third party EI8: or
(4> By utilising a Joint EPA/State
process on projects within States
which have requirements and proce-
dures comparable to NEPA. whereby
the EPA and the Stale agree to pre-
pare ft single EOS document to fuUID
both federal and State requirements.
Both EPA and the State shall sign a
Memorandum of Agreement which In-
cludes the responsibilities and proce-
dures to be used by both panics for
the preparation of the EIS as provided
for In 40 CFR 1506.1(0.
f*JII
of bcdihin (ROB) to
I ten
(a) Accord o/ Aecftfon. After ft final
EIS has been Issued, the responsible
offlelal snail prepare and Issue a ROD
In accordance wKh 40 CFR 1506.3
prior to. or In conjunction with, the
approval of the faculties plan. The
ROD shan Include Identification of
mitigation measures derived from the
EIS process Including grant conditions
which an necessary to minimise the
advene Impacts of the selected alter-
native.
(b) Sfectfle mitigation measure*.
Prior to the approval of a facilities
plan, the responsible official must
ensure that effective mitigation meas-
ures Identified In the HOD wlB be Im-
plemented by the grantee. This should
be done by reviling the facilities plan.
Initiating other steps to mitigate ad-
vene effects, or Including conditions
In grants requiring actions to minimise
effects. Care should be exercised If a
condition b to be Imposed tit a grant
document to assure that the applicant
possesses the authority to fulfill the
conditions.
(e) Proceeding with grant awards,
(1) Once the ROD has been prepared
on the selected, or preferred.
alternative^) for the treatment works
described within the BIS. grant
awards may proceed without the prep-
aration of supplemental EISs unless
the responsible official later deter-
mines that the project or the environ-
mental conditions described within the
current E18 have changed significant-
ly from the previous environmental
review In accordance with 11M3.KO
of thb title.
<3> For all BIS/ROD determinations:
(I) That are five or more yean old on
projects awaiting Step 2+3 or Step 3
grant funding, the responsible official
hall re-evaluate the project environ-
mental conditions and public views
and. prior to grant award, either
(A) Aewflrm-lssue a public notice
reaffirming EPA'a decision to proceed
with the project snd documenting
that no additional significant Impacts
were Identified during the re-evalua-
tion which would require supplement-
ing the Clft or
(B> Supplementconduct additional
studies and prepare. Issue and distrib-
ute supplemental EIS In accordance
with 10.404 and document the origi-
nal, or any revised, decision In an ad-
dendum to the ROD.
(II) That are made on projects that
have been awarded Step 3+3 grant,
the responsible official shall, at the
tune of plans and specifications review
under | U.HOttb) of this title, assess
whether the environmental conditions
or the project's anticipated Impact on
the environment have changed, and
prior to plans and speeUteaUens ap-
proval, advise the Regional Adminis-
trator If additional environmental
review b i
ISO PR lt»T. JUM U. MM. as amended'kt
tl Fit »M1». Sept la. inai
IUI1 MMllorhignrt
(a) General The responsible official
shall ensure adequate monitoring of
mitigation measures and other grant
conditions Identified In the FN8I. or
ROD.
(b) Cn/brcemenC. If the grantee falls
to comply with grant conditions, the
responsible official may consider ap-
plying any of the sanctions specified
In 40 CFR 30.000.
I Ml* Public partklpslloii.
(a) General Consistent with public
participation regulations In part 2B of
this title, and subpart D of thb part. It
b EPA policy that certain public par-
ticipation steps be achieved before the
Bute and EPA complete the environ-
mental review process. As » minimum.
all potential applicants that do not
qualify for a categorical exclusion
shall conduct the following steps In ac-
cordance with procedures specified In
part 38 of thb title:
<1> One public meeting when alter-
natives have been developed.' bat
before an alternative has been select-
ed, to discuss all alternatives under
consideration and the reasons for re-
jection of other*; and
(3) One public hearing prior to
formal adoption of a facilities plan to
discuss the proposed facilities plan
and any needed mitigation measures.
(b) Coordination. Public participa-
tion activities undertaken In connec-
«MI with the environment*! review
40 OHl Ch. I (7-1-91
process should be coordinated with
any other applicable public participa-
tion program wherever possible.
(e) Scope. The requirements of 40
CFR 0.400 shall be fulfilled, and con-
sistent with 40 CFR 1801.6. the re-
sponsible official may tnitttuU such
additional NEPA related public par-
tJcJpfttfoti procedures u vtr deemed
necessary during the environmental
review process*
ISO Fit WIT. June 19. 19*5. u amended st
at PR SMI J. Sept. II. 1M6I
IU1I DekgalloB to States.
(ft) General Authority delegated to
the State under section 2084 g) ol the
Clean Water Act to review a faculties
plan may Include alt EPA activities
under this part except for the follow-
ing:
(1) Determinations ol whether or
not a project qualifies for a categorical
exclusion:
(3) Determinations to partition the
environmental review process:
(3) Finalizing the scope of an BID
when required to adequately conclude
an Independent review of a prelimi-
nary environmental assessment;
(4) Finalising the scope of an envi-
ronmental aaoeasemeni, and flnaltza-
tlon. approval and Issuance of a final
environmental assessment;
(B) Determination to Issue, and Issu-
ance of. a PNSI based on a completed
or partitioned <|6.M1 (1) and (3). final decisions
required for preparing an EIS under
l«.61WbH3>. finalizing the agreement
to prepare an EIS under 1 0.61.
finalizing the cope of an EIS. and Is-
suance of draft final and supplemen-
tal BISs;
(8> Preparation and tasuance of the
ROD based on an EIS;
(0) Final decisions under other appli-
cable laws described In subpart C of
this part;
(10) Determination following re-eval-
uations of projects awaiting grant
funding In the case of Step 3 projects
whose existing evaluations and/or de
-------
clilon documents are five 'or more
yean old. or determinations following
re-evaluations on projects submitted
for plans and specifications review and
approval In the eaae of awarded Step
2+3 projects where the EPA Regional
Administrator has been advised that
additional environmental review Is
necessary. In accordance with
I ISOMdXa). 16.508 nimlnaHon o/duplication. The
responsible official shall assure that
maximum efforts are undertaken to
minimize duplication within the limits
described under paragraph (a) of this
section. In carrying out requlrementsi
under this subpart. maximum consid-
eration shall be given to eliminating
duplication In accordance with 11806.9
of this title. Where there are State or
local procedures comparable to NEPA.
EPA should enter Into memoranda of
understanding with these States con-
cernlng workload distribution and re-
sponslbllltles not specifically reserved
to EPA In paragraph (a) of this section
for Implementing the environmental
review and facilities planning process.
ISO FR Mill. June M. IMS. at amended at
SI FR 1M11. Sept. 1119MI
MOO Purpose.
(a) General. This subpart provides
procedures for carrying out the envi-
ronmental review process for the Issu-
ance of new source National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) discharge permits author-
Iced under section 300. section 402. and
section BIKcMl) of the Clean Water
Act
(b) Permit reputation*. All refer-
ences In this subpart to the permit rep-
utation* shall mean parts 122 and 124
of title 40 of the CPR relating to the
NPDES program.
144 PR MI77. Nov. 6. IV19. w amended st 47
PR 9811. Mar. B. 19811
IM04
JO! Definitions.
.(a) The term adminfafratipe action
for the sake of this subpart means the
Issuance by EPA of an NPDES permit
to discharge as a new source, pursuant
to 40 CPR 124.1B.
(b) The term applicant for the sake
of this subpart means any person who
applies to EPA for the Issuance of an
NPDES permit to discharge as a new
144 PR 64117. Nov.«. IMS. at amended at 47
PR 9811. If ar. 8.198)1
16.66* AppHeaMlhy.
(a) General The procedures set
forth under subparts A. B. C and D.
and this subpart shall apply to the Is-
suance of new source NPDES permits.
except for the Issuance of a new
source NPDES permit from any State
which has an approved NPDES pro-
gram In accordance with section 40»b>
of the Clean Water Act.
(b) New Source Determination. An
NPDES permittee must be determined
a new *ouree before these procedures
apply. New source determinations will
be undertaken pursuant to the provi-
sions of the permit regulations under
I I22.29U) and (b) of this chapter and
1122.63
KHAL Rnisna. distribute the notice of
Intent and arrange and conduct a scop-
Ing meeting as outlined In 40 CPR
1501.7.
(2) If the responsible official and the
permit applicant agree to a third party
method of EIS preparation, pursuant
to |0.004 SIS method. EPA shall prepare
EISs by one of the following means:
(1) Directly by Its own staff:
(2) By contracting directly with a
qualified consulting firm: or
(!) By utilizing a third party
method, whereby the responsible offi-
cial enters Into a third party agree-
ment for the applicant to engage and
pay for the services of a third party
contractor to prepare the EIS. Such
an agreement shall not be Initiated
unless both the applicant and the re-
sponsible official agree to Its creation.
A third party agreement will be estab-
lished prior to the applicant's environ-
mental Information document and
eliminate the need for that document.
In proceeding under the third party
-------
agreement, the responsible official
shall carry out the following practices:
(I) In consultation with the appli-
cant, choose the third party contrac-
tor and manage that contract.
(II) Select the consultant based on
his ability and an absence of conflict
of Interest. Third party contractors
will be required to execute a disclosure
statement prepared by the responsible
official signifying they have no finan-
cial or other conflicting Interest In the
outcome of the project
(III) Specify the Information to be
developed and supervise the gathering.
analysis and presentation of the Infor-
mation. The responsible official shall
nave sole authority for approval and
modification of the statements, analy-
ses, and conclusions Included In the
third party EIS.
(h) Docttmcnto /or Me odmtnMra-
live record. Pursuant to 40 CPR
13«.MbK6> and 134.18 any envi-
ronmental assessment. FNSI EIS. or
supplement to an EIS shall be made a
part of the administrative record relat-
O ed to permit Issuance.
J-. 144 PR 84111. No*. 8.1878. amended at 47
O\ PR 8831. Msr. 8.1983)
88.806 Criteria for preparing BIS*.
(a) General guideline* (1) When de-
termining the significance of a pro-
posed new source's Impact, the respon-
sible official shall consider both Its
short term and long term effects as
well as Its direct and Indirect effects
and beneficial and adverse environ-
mental Impacts as defined In 40 CPR
1508.8.
(2) If EPA Is proposing to Issue a
number of new source NPDE8 permits
during a limited time span and In the
same general geographic area, the re-
sponsible official shall examine the
possibility of tiering EISs. If the per-
mits are minor and environmentally
Insignificant when considered sepa-
rately, the responsible official may de-
termine that the cumulative Impact of
the Issuance of all these permits may
have a significant environmental
effect and require an EIS for the area.
Each separate decision to Issue sn
PPDES permit shall then be based on
r formation In this areawlde EIS.
tdfte EISs may be required In
certain circumstances In addition to
the mvfm-vi\^f EIS.
(b> Specific criteria. An EIS will be
prepared when:
'(1) The new source will Induce or ac-
celerate significant changes In Indus-
trial, commercial, agricultural, or resi-
dential land use concentrations or dis-
tributions which have the potential
for significant environmental effects.
Factors that should be considered In
determining If these changes are envi-
ronmentally significant Include but
are not limited to: The nature and
extent of the vacant land subject to In-
creased development pressure as a
result of the new source; the Increases
In population or population density
which may be Induced and the ramifi-
cations of such changes; the nature of
land use regulations In the affected
area and their potential effects on de-
velopment and the environment: and
the changes In the availability or
demand for energy and the resulting
environmental consequences.
(» The new source will directly, or
through Induced development, have
significant adverse effect upon local
ambient air quality, local ambient
noise levels., floodplalns. surface or
groundwater quality or quantity, fish.
wildlife, and their natural habitats.
(3) Any major part of the new source
will have significant advene effect on
the habitat of threatened or endan-
gered species on the Department of
the Interior's or a State's lists of
threatened and endangered species.
(4) The environmental Impact of the
Issuance of a new source NPDES
permit will have significant direct and
adverse effect on a property listed In
or eligible for listing In the National
Register of Historic Places.
(5) Any major part of the source will
have significant adverse effects on
parklands. wetlands, wild and scenic
rivers, reservoirs or other Important
bodies of water, navigation projects, or
agricultural lands.
88.888 Record of deeltlon.
(a) General At the time of permit
award, the responsible official shall
prepare a record of decision In those
cases where a final EIS was Issued In
accordance with 40 CPR 1505.3 and
§ 6.607
pursuant to the provisions of the
permit regulations under 40 CPR
124.18 and 134.18
-------
(2) For extramural research
project*, the environmental review
hall be conducted before an Initial or
continuing award la made. The appro-
priate program official will perform
the environmental review In accord-
ance with the process set forth hi this
mibpart and depleted In figure 1. EPA
form 6300-33 will be uwd to document
categorical exclusion determinations
or. with appropriate supporting analy-
sis, as the environmental assessment
(EA). The completed form 6300-23 and
any finding of no significant Impact
(FNSI) or environmental Impact state-
ment (EIS) will be submitted with the
proposal package to the appropriate
EPA assistance or contract office.
(c) Agenev coordination. In order to
avoid ^duplication of effort and ensure
consistency throughout the Agency.
environmental reviews of ORD
projects will be coordinated, as appro-
priate and feasible, with reviews per-
formed by other program offices.
Technical support documents pre-
pared for reviews In other EPA pro-
grams may be adopted for use In
ORD's environmental reviews and sup-
plemented. as appropriate.
01704 Categories! eichnloiis.
(a) At the beginning of the environ-
mental review process (see Figure 1).
.the appropriate program official shall
determine whether an ORD project
can be categorically excluded from the
substantive requirements of a NEPA
review. This determination shall be
based on general criteria In 18.107
and specialised categories of ORD ac-
tions eligible for exclusion In
16.704(b). If the appropriate program
official determines that an ORD
project Is consistent with the general
criteria and any of the specialized cat-
egories of eligible activities, and does
not satisfy the criteria In 16.107Ce) for
not granting a categorical exclusion.
then this finding shall be documented
and no further action shall be re-
quired. A categorical exclusion shall
be revoked by the appropriate pro-
gram official If It Is determined that
the project meets the criteria for revo-
cation In 16.10KO. Projects that fall
to qualify for categorical exclusion or
for which categorical exclusion has
been revoked must undergo full envl-
{.705
ronmental review In accordance with
16.T08 and 16.708.
(b) The following specialized catego-
ries of ORD actions are eligible for
categorical exclusion from a detailed
NEPA review:
(1) Library or literature searches
and studies;
(91 Computer studies and activities:
(3) Monitoring and sample collection
wherein no significant alteration of
existing ambient conditions occurs;
(4) Projects conducted completely
within a contained facility, such as a
laboratory or other enclosed building.
where methods are employed for ap-
propriate disposal of laboratory wastes
and safeguards exist against hazard-
ous, toxic, and radioactive materials
entering the environment. Laboratory
directors or other appropriate officials
must certify and provide documenta-
tion that the laboratory follows good
laboratory practices and adheres to
applicable federal statutes, regulations
and guidelines.
finding of no itanlflcanl Impact
(a) When a project does not meet
any of the criteria for categorical ex-
clusion, the appropriate program offi-
cial shall undertake an environmental
assessment In accordance with 40 CFR
1608.8 In order to determine whether
an EIS to required or If a FNSI can be
made. ORD projects which normally
result In the preparation of an EA In-
clude the following:
(1) Initial field demonstration of a
new technology:
(2) Field trials of a new product or
new uses of an existing technology:
(3) Alteration of a local habitat by
physical or chemical means.
(b> If the environmental assessment
reveals that the research b not antici-
pated to have a significant Impact on
the environment, the appropriate pro-
gram official shall prepare a FNSI In
accordance with 16.103U). Pursuant to
|6.40Wd>. no administrative action
will be taken on a project until the
prescribed 30-day comment period for
a FNSI has elapsed and the Agency
has fully considered all comments.
(c) On actions Involving potentially
significant Impacts on the environ-
§*JO*
ment. a.FNSI may be prepared If
changes have been made hi the pro-
posed action to eliminate any slgnlfl-
cant Impacts. These changes must be
documented In the proposal and In the
FNSI.
(d) If the environmental assessment
reveals that the research may have a
significant Impact on the environment.
an EIS must be prepared. The appro-
priate program official may make a de-
termination that an EIS to necessary
without preparing a formal environ-
mental assessment This determina-
tion may be made by applying the cri-
terla for preparation of an EIS hi
16.708.
66.708 Envlranmenlal Impact statement.
(a) Criteria for preparation. In per-
forming the environmental review, the
appropriate program official shall
assure that an EIS to prepared when
any of the conditions under 16.108 (a)
through (g) exist or when:
(I) The proposed action may signifi-
cantly affect the environment through
the release of radioactive, hazardous
or toxic substances;
(2) The proposed action, through
the release of an organism or orga-
nisms, may Involve environmental ef-
fects which are significant:
(3) The proposed action Involves ef-
fects upon the environment which are
likely to be highly controversial:
(4) The proposed action Involves en-
vironmental effects which may accu-
mulate over time or combine with ef-
fects of other actions to create Impacts
which are significant;
40 CM Ch. I (7-1-91 fdMon)
(6) The proposed action Involves urn
certain environmental effects or
highly unique environmental risks
which may be significant
(b) ORD action* which mat retulte
preparation of an EIS. There are no
ORD actions which normally require
the preparation of an EIS. However.
each ORD project will be evaluated
using the EIS criteria as stated In
|6.706(a> to determine whether an
EIS must be prepared.
(c) Notice of Intent (I) If the envi-
ronmental review reveals that a pro-
posed action may have a significant
effect on the environment and this
effect cannot be eliminated by redirec-
tion of the research or other means.
the appropriate program official shall
Issue a notice of Intent to prepare an
EIS pursuant to 16.400(b>.
(2) As soon as possible after release
of the notice of Intent, the appropriate
program official shall ensure that a
draft EIS to prepared In accordance
with subpart B and that the public to
Involved In accordance with subpart D.
(3) Draft and final EISi shall be sent
to the Assistant Administrator for
ORD for approval.
(4) Pursuant to 18.40Kb). a decision
on whether to undertake or fund a
project must be made In conformance
with the time frames Indicated.
(d) Jtecont of decition. Before the
project to undertaken or funded, the
appropriate program official shall pre-
pare. In accordance with 16.108 (g)
and (h). a record of decision In any
case where a final EIS has been Issued.
-------
Mpt* |. (wlroMMUl mrlw procets for Oft projects.
(MOO
9
>»
oo
VOV 90110 ^TttUv
Vtew
PB.8M
Thto subpart amplifies the
dures described In subparts A through
O by providing more specific environ-
mental review procedure! for demon-
stration project* undertaken by the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response.
Ml Fit MITT. Nov. 6. Itls. oa amended at SI
FRlM13.8epl.il. 1MSI
11801 ApplkmblBlr.
The requirements of this subpart
apply to solid waste demonstration
projects for resource recovery systems
and Improved solid waste disposal fa-
cilities undertaken pursuant to section
8006 of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act of 1976.
IBM Criteria for preparinf EBs.
The responsible official shall assure
that an EIS will be prepared when It Is
determined that any of the conditions
In | .108 exist.
M4 PR M1T1. No*, s. 1»7S. M amended at SO
FR M1U. June IS. 19BSI
I MM Embi
I i
Timing of action. Pursuant to
|6.«01ib>. ln.no case shall a contract
or grant be awarded until the pre-
scribed 30-day review period for a final
EIB has elapsed. Similarly, no action
shall be taken until the 30-day com-
ment period for a FNSI Is completed.
0«.80I Record of dcehlon.
The responsible official shall pre-
pare a record of decision In any caw
where final E18 has been Issued In ac-
cordance with 40 CPR ISOS.3. It shall
be prepared at the time of contract or
grant award. The record of decision
shall list any mitigation measures nec-
essary to make the recommended al-
ternative environmentally acceptable.
pott AcHvHws
BC.90* Porpow.
This subpart amplifies the general
requirements described In subparta A
through D by providing environmental
procedures for the preparation of EISs
on construction and renovation of spe-
cial purpose facilities.
CCMI
(a) The term tpectal purpote facility
means a building or space. Including
land Incidental to Its use. which Is
wholly or predominantly utilized for
-------
the special purpose of an agency and
not generally ralUble for other uses.
as determined by the General Services
(bl The term, program of require-
ment* means a comprehensive docu-
ment (booklet) describing program ac-
tivities to be accomplished In the new
special purpose facility or Improve-
ment It Includes architectural, me-
chanical, structural, and space require-
ments.
(c) The term scope of work means a
document similar In content to the
program of requirements but substan-
tially abbreviated. It ta usually pre-
pared for small-scale projects.
MM AstJtcaMHty.
(a) Action* covered. These proce-
dures apply to all new special purpose
facility construction, activities related
to this construction (e.g.. site acquisi-
tion sad clearing), and any Improve-
ments or modifications to faculties
having potential environmental effects
external to the facility. Including new
? construction and Improvements under-
taken and funded by the Facilities En-
*- gineerlng and Real Estate Branch. Fa-
vO ellltles and Support Services Division.
Office of the Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resource
Management^ by a regional office.
(b) Action* excluded. This subpart
does not apply to those activities of
the Faculties Engineering and Real
Estate Branch. Facilities and Support
Services Division, for which the
branch does not have full fiscal re-
sponsibility for the entire project.
This Includes pilot plant construction.
land acquisition, site clearing and
access road construction where the Fa-
cilities Engineering and Real Estate
Branch's activity Is only supporting a
project financed by a program office.
Responsibility for considering the en-
vironmental Impacts of such projects
rests with the office managing and
funding the entire project. Other sub-
parts of this regulation apply depend-
ing on the nature of the project.
144 PR 64177. Nov.«. WTO. aa amended at SI
PR 12811. Sept. II. 10SSI
6.903 Criteria for preparing EISi.
Preliminary information. The re-
sponsible official shall request an envi-
|«.904
ronmental Information document
from a construction contractor or con-
sulting architect/engineer employed
by EPA If he Is Involved hi the plan-
ning, construction or modification of
special purpose faculties when his ac-
tivities have potential environmental
effects external to .the faculty. Such
modifications Include but are not lim-
ited to facility additions, changes In
central heating systems or wastewater
treatment systems, and land clearing
for access roads and parking lota.
(b) SIS preparation criteria. The re-
sponsible official shall conduct an en-
vironmental review of all actions In-
volving construction of special purpose
faculties and Improvements to these
faculties. The responsible official shall
assure that an EIS will be prepared
when It Is determined that any of the
conditions hi 16.108 of this part exist.
144 PR 64177. Nov. 6.1070. ss amended at BO
PR 36333. June 30.10U1
16.004 Environmental review sioeem.
(a) fnvironmental review. (1) An en-
vironmental review shall be conducted
when the program of requliementa or
scope of work has been completed for
the construction. Improvements, or
modification of special purpose facili-
ties. For special purpose facility con-
struction, the Chief. Faculties Engi-
neering and Real Estate Branch, shall
request the assistance of the appropri-
ate program office and Regional Ad-
ministrator In the review. For modifi-
cations and Improvement, the appro-
priate responsible official shall request
assistance hi making the review from
other cognizant EPA offices.
(3) Any environmental Information
documents requested shall contain the
same sections listed for EISs In sub-
part B. Contractors and consultant!
shall be notified In contractual docu-
ments when an environmental Infor-
mation document must be prepared.
(b) Notice of intent, SIS. and FNSl.
The responsible official shall decide at
the completion of the Environmental
review whether there may be any sig-
nificant environmental Impacts. If
there could be significant environmen-
tal Impacts, a notice of Intent and an
EIS shall be prepared according to the
procedures under subparts A. B. C and
9 0.905
D. If there are not any significant en-
vironmental Impacts, a FN8I shall be
prepared according to the procedures
In subparts A and D. The FNSI shall
list any mitigation measures necessary
to make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
(e) Timing of action. Pursuant to
16.401(b>. In no ease shall a contract
be awarded or construction activities
begun until the prescribed 30-day wait
period for a final EIS has elapsed.
Similarly, under |6.400(d). no action
shall be taken until the 30-day com-
ment period for FNSIs Is completed.
I MOT Record of declikm.
At the time of contract award, the
responsible official shall prepare a
record of decision In those cases where
a final EIS has been Issued In accord-
ance with 40 CFR 1505.3. The record
of decision shall list any mitigation
measures necessary to make the rec-
ommended alternative environmental-
ly acceptable.
of EPA
ADTROSITT: Executive Order 11114. 41
UAC.41».note.
Soimcc 46 PR 1164. Jan. 14. 1M1. unlen
otherwise noted.
6.1001 Pwpoac and policy.
(a) Purpose. On January 4.1079. the
President signed Executive Order
13114 entitled "Environmental Effects
Abroad of Major Federal Actions."
The purpose of this Executive Order Is
to enable responsible Federal officials
In carrying out or approving major
Federal actions which affect foreign
nations or the global commons to be
Informed of pertinent environmental
considerations and to consider fully
the environmental Impacts of the ac-
tions undertaken. While based on In-
dependent authority, this Order fur-
thers the purpose of the National En-
vironmental Policy Act (NEPA) (43
U.8.C. section 4331 ef teg.} and the
Marine Protection Research and Sanc-
tuaries Act (MPRSA) (33 VS.C. sec-
tion 1401 et *eg.t. It should be noted.
however, that In fulfilling Its responsl-
40 Cm Ch. I (7-1-91 IdrHoti)
bllltles under Executive Order 13114.
EPA shall be guided by CEQ regula-
tions only to the extent that they are
made expressly applicable by this sub-
part. The procedures set forth below
reflect EPA's duties and responsibil-
ities ss required under the Executive
Order and satisfy the requirement for
Issuance of procedures under section
3-1 of the Executive Order.
(b) Policy. It shall be the policy of
this Agency to carry out the purpose
and requirements of the Executive
Order to the fullest extent possible.
EPA. within the realm of Ite expertise.
shall work with the Department of
State and the Council on Environmen-
tal Quality to provide Information to
other Federal agencies and foreign na-
tions to heighten awareness of and In-
terest bi the environment. EPA shall
further cooperate to the extent possi-
ble with Federal agencies to lend spe-
cial expertise and assistance In the
preparation of required environmental
documents under the Executive Order.
EPA shall perform environmental re-
views of activities significantly affect-
Ing the global commons and foreign
nations as required under Executive
Order 13114 and as set forth under
these procedures.
06.1003 Applicability.
(a) Administrative actions requiring
environmental review. The environ-
mental review requirements apply to
the activities of EPA as set forth
below:
(1> Major research or demonstration
projects which affect the global com-
mons or a foreign nation.
(3) Ocean dumping activities carried
out under section 103 of the MPRSA
which affect the related environment
(3) Major permitting or licensing by
EPA of facilities which affect the
global commons or the environment of
a foreign nation. This may Include
such actions ss the Issuance by EPA of
hazardous waste treatment, storage, or
disposal facility permits pursuant to
section 3000 of the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (43 O.8.C. Sec-
tion 0035). NPDE8 permits pursuant
to section 403 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. section 1343). and preven-
tion of significant deterioration ap-
-------
prorate pursuant to Put C of the
dean Air Act (49 UAC. section 1470
etseq.).
(4) Wastewater Treatment Construc-
tlon Oranta Program under section
Ml of the Clean Water Act when ac-
tivities addressed In the facility plan
would have environmental effects
abroad.
(6) Other EPA activities as deter-
mined by OER and OIA -(see
18.1001(0).
111003 Definition!.
As used In this subpart. environment
means the natural and physical envi-
ronment and excludes social, economic
and other environments: global com-
mon* Is' that area (land. air. water)
outside the Jurisdiction of any nation:
and reiponriofe official Is either the
EPA Assistant Administrator or Re-
gional Administrator as appropriate
for the particular EPA program. Also.
an action iignifleanUy affects the en-
vironment If It does font/leant harm
to the environment even though on
balance the action may be beneficial
O to the environment. To the extent ap-
^ pllcable. the responsible official shall
O address the considerations set forth In
the CEQ Regulations under 40 CFR
1508.37 In determining significant
effect
I &IOM EnvlrontiMiiwl KVMW UM UMH*
(a) Jtefeareh and demonsfraHon
projects. The appropriate Assistant
Administrator Is responsible for per-
forming the necessary degree of envi-
ronmental review on research and
demonstration projects undertaken by
EPA. If the research or demonstration
project affects the environment of the
global commons, the applicant shall
prepare an environmental analysis.
This will asBlst the responsible official
In determining whether an EI8 Is nec-
essary. If It Is determined that the
action significantly affects the envi-
ronment of the global commons, then
an EIB shall be prepared. If the under-
taking significantly affects a foreign
nation EPA shall prepare a unilateral.
bilateral or multilateral environmental
sti"*~ EPA shall afford the affected
f latlon or International body or
« Uon an opportunity to partld-
{6.1004
pate In this study. This environmental
study shall discuss the need for the
action, analyse the environmental
Impact of the various alternatives con-
sidered and list the agencies and other
parties consulted.
(b> Ocean dumping activities (1)
The Assistant Administrator for
Water and Waste Management shall
ensure the preparation of appropriate
environmental documents relating to
ocean dumping activities In the global
commons under section 10> of the
MPR8A. For ocean dumping site des-
ignations prescribed pursuant to sec-
tion 109(0 of the HPR8A and 40 CPR
part 298. EPA shall prepare an envi-
ronmental Impact statement consist-
ent with the requirements of EPA's
Procedures for the Voluntary Prepara-
tion of Environmental Impact State-
ments dated October 91. 1014 (see 30
PR 31410). Also EPA shall prepare an
environmental Impact statement for
the establishment or revision of crite-
ria under section 109(a) of MPR8A.
(9) For Individual permit* Issued by
EPA under section 10Mb) an environ-
mental assessment shall be made by
EPA. Pursuant to 40 CFR part 991.
the permit applicant shall submit with
the application an environmental anal-
ysis which Includes a discussion of the
need for the action, an outline of al-
ternatives. and an analysis of the envi-
ronmental Impact of the proposed
action and alternatives consistent with
the EPA criteria established under
section 10»a> of MPR8A. The Infor-
mation submitted under 40 CFR part
991 shall be sufficient to satisfy the
environmental assessment require-
ment.
(c) SPA permitting and Hcenting ac-
tivities The appropriate Regional Ad-
ministrator Is responsible for conduct-
big concise environmental reviews
with regard to permits Issued under
section 3005 of the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (RCRA per-
mits). section 409 of the Clean Water
Act (NPDES permits), and section 185
of the Clean Air Act (PSD permits).
for such actions undertaken by EPA
which affect the global commons or
foreign nations. The Information sub-
mitted by applicants for such permits
or approvals under the applicable con- ~
solldated permit regulations (40 CFR
g 0.1005
parts 199 and 194) and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) regu-
lations (40 CFR part 09) shall satisfy
the environmental document require-
ment under section 9-4(b) of Execu-
tive Order 19114. Compliance with ap-
plicable requirements In part 194 of
the consolidated permit regulations
(40 CFR part 194) shall be sufficient
to satisfy the requirements to conduct
a concise environmental review for
permits subject to this paragraph.
(d) Wattewater treatment facility
planning. 40 CFR 8.000 details the en-
vironmental review process for the fa-
cilities planning process under the
wastewater treatment works construc-
tion grants program. For the purpose
of these regulations, the facility plan
shftll ftlso Include ft concise environ*
mental review of those activities that
would have environmental effects
abroad. This shall apply only to the
Step 1 grants awarded after January
14. 1001. but on or before December
90.1081. and faculties plans developed
after December 90.1081. Where water
quality Impacts Identified In a facility
plan are the subject or water quality
agreements with Canada or Mexico.
nothing In these regulations shall
Impose on the facility planning proc-
ess coordination and consultation re-
quirements In addition to those re-
quired by such agreements.
(e) Review by other Federal agenciet
and other appropriate official*. The
responsible officials shall consult with
other Federal agencies with relevant
expertise during the preparation of
the environmental document. As
as feasible after preparation of the en-
vironmental document, the responsl-
Me official shall make the document
available to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality. Department of State.
and other appropriate officials. The
responsible official with assistance
from OIA shall work with the Depart-
ment of State to establish procedures
for communicating with and making
documents available to foreign nations
and International organizations.
146 Fit MM. Jan. 14.1981. ai amended at 60
FRa6»6.JiineS8.1M8)
011006 Lead or <
40 Cm Ch. I (7-1-91 Idlrlon)
atlon of a lead agency whenever an
action Involves more than one federal
agency. In Implementing section 3-3.
EPA shall, to the fullest extent possi-
ble, follow the guidance for the selec-
tion of a lead agency contained In 40
CFR 1601.0 of the CEQ regulations.
(b) Cooperating Agenev. Under sec-
tion 3-4(d> of the Executive Order.
Federal agencies with special expertise
are encouraged to provide appropriate
resources to the agency preparing en-
vironmental documents In order to
avoid duplication of resources. In
working with a lead agency. EPA shall
to the fullest extent possible serve as a
cooperating agency In accordance with
40 CFR 1601.0. When other program
commitments preclude the degree of
Involvement requested by the lead
agency, the responsible EPA official
shall so Inform the lead agency In
writing.
.IBM Eiemptlons snd eoniMeraUwu.
Under section 9-6 (b> and (c) of the
Executive Order. Federal agencies
may provide for modifications In the
contents, timing and availability of
documents or exemptions from certain
requirements for the environmental
review and assessment. The responsi-
ble official. In consultation with the
Director. Office of Environmental
Review (OER), and the Director.
Office of International Activities
(OIA). may approve modifications for
situations described In section 9-8(b).
The responsible official. In consulta-
tion with the Director. OER and Di-
rector OIA. shall obtain exemptions
from the Administrator for situations
described In section 9-6(e). The De-
partment of State and the Council on
Environmental Quality shall be con-
sulted as soon as possible on the utili-
sation of such exemptions.
OlIMT Inpl
gage
a) Lead Agent* Section 3-3 of Exec-
e Order 13114 requires the ere-
(a) OventghL OER Is responsible for
overseeing the Implementation of
these procedures and shall consult
with OIA wherever appropriate. OIA
shall be utilised for making formal
contacts with the Department of
State. OER shall assist the responsible
officials In carrying out their responsi-
bilities under these procedures.
-------
(b) Information exchange. OER with
the aid of OIA. ghoJI assist the Depart-
ment of Stole and the Council on Eh-
vtronmentaJ Quality In developing the
Infomutlonal eichange on envlron-
mental review aetlvltlea with foreign
Fl.6,A|>p.A
ronmenUI Policy Act (NEPA) and OMB A-
In
here the environmental Impact* of pro-
significant enoiifh to
Provide the public with early and con-
tinuing Information concerning floodplaln
management and with opportunities for
participating ta decision making Including
the fevaluation of) tradeoff* among compet-
ing alternative*.
c. The Agency shall Incorporate wetlands
protection considerations Into Its planning.
regulatory, and deetalonmaklng processes. It
hall minimize the destruction, toss, or deg-
radation of wetlands and preserve and en-
hance the natural and beneficial value* of
wetlands. Agency activities shall continue to
be carried out consistent with the Adminis-
trator's Decision Statement No. 4 dated
February 11. IBM entitled "EPA Policy to
Protect the Nation's Wetlands."
Aerie* « DeflntUoia
a. BOM flood means that Hood which has
a one percent chance of occurrence ta any
given year latao known as a 100-year flood).
This term ta used In the National Flood In-
surance Program (NFIP) to Indicate the
minimum level of flooding to be used by a
community In It* floodplaln management
regulations.
b. BOM floodpnln mean* the land area
by a 100-year Hood'(one percent
floodplaln). Also see definition of
floodplaln.
e. Rood or flooding means a general and
temporary condition of partial or complete
Inundation of normally dry land areas from
the overflow of Inland and/or tidal waters.
and/or the unusual and rapid accumulation
or runoff of surface waters from any source.
or flooding from any other source.
d. ftoodptata means the lowland and rela-
tively flat areas adjoining Inland and coastal
water* and other floodprone areas such as
offshore Islands. Including at a minimum.
that area subject to a one percent or greater
chance of flooding ta any given year. The
base ftoodplata shall be used to designate
the 100-year ftoodplaln (one percent chance
floodplaln). The critical action floodplata ta
defined as the 500-year floodplaln (O.J per-
40 CM Ch. I (7-1-91 Union)
I. Jtesfore means to re-establish a setting
or environment In which the natural func-
tions of the floodplaln can again operate.
J. Wetland* mean* those arras that are In-
undated by surface or ground water with a
frequency sufficient to support and under
normal circumstance! doe* or would support
a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life
that requires saturated or seasonally satu-
rated soil conditions for growth and repro-
duction. Wetlands generally Include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas
such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows.
river overflow*, mud flat*, and natural
Action 5 ApptlcabUllt ..
a. The Executive Orders apply to activities
of Federal agencies pertaining to <1> acquir-
ing, managing, and disposing of Federal
lands and facilities. (» providing Federally
undertaken, financed, or assisted construc-
tion and Improvement*, and (I) conducting
Federal activities and program* affecting
land use. Including but not limited to water
and related land resources-planning, regu-
lating, and licensing activities.
b. These procedure* shall apply to EPA's
programs as follows: (I) All Agency actions
involving construction of facilities or man-
agement of lands or property. Thb will re-
quire amendment of the BPA Facilities
Management Manual (October 1073 and re-
visions thereafter).
(3) All Agency actions where the NEPA
process applies. This would Include the pro-
grams under sections 300/403 of the Clean
Water Act pertaining to new source permit-
ting and section 301 of the Clean Water Act
pertaining to wastewater treatment con-
struction grants.
(3) All agency actions where there ta suffi-
cient Independent statutory authority to
carry out the floodplaln/wetlands proce-
(3) Restore and preserve natural and ben-
eficial values served by floodplalns:
(4) Require the construction of EPA struc-
tures and faculties to be ta accordance with
the standard* and criteria, of the regula-
tions promulgated^ pursuant to the National
Flood Insurance Program!
(S) Identify floodplatas which require res-
toration and preservation and recommend
management programs necessary to protect
these noodplata* and to Include such con-
siderations as part of on-going plsnnln* pro-
e. floodproqflnp means modification of In-
dividual structures and faculties, their sites.
end their content* to protect against struc-
tural failure, to keep water out or to reduce
effect* of water entry.
f. JVtalmUe means to reduce to the i
eat possible amount or degree.
i within existing constraint*. The test of
i the sltua-
(4) In program areas where there ta no
BIS requirement nor clear statutory author-
ity for EPA to require procedural Implemen-
tation. EPA shall continue to provide lead-
ership and offer guidance so that the value
of noodplata management and wetlands
protection can be understood and carried
out to the maximum extent practicable In
tlon and Include* consideration of the perti-
nent factor* such a* environment, communi-
ty welfare, cost, or technology.
h. Patent means to prevent modification
' to the natural ftoodplata environment or to
maintain II a* closely as possible to It* natu-
ral state.
««. >» -.!
e. These procedures shall not apply to any
permitting or source review program* of ^,
EPA once such authority has been trans- £
ferred or delegated to a State. However. P
EPA shall, to the extent possible, require
State* to provide equivalent effort to assure ^
support for the objective* of these proce-
dures a* part of the state assumption proe-
-------
pt.«,Ag«.A PI. «, AS*. A
(I)
Before
dertaklni an Agency action, each
procnm offlee mint <
not the MUen «fll be bated In or affect a
noodpleJn or wetland*. The
ape prepared by the Federal Inur-
() Ayntet OeeMm-Aftar <
of alternative action, ti they have been
modified to the preceding analyst*, the
Agency shall eeleet the'deetrad alternative.
fat all Agency action propoeed to be In or
affecting floodplaln/wetland*. the Agency
allbeae-
shall provide further public notice i
tag this decision. This
anee Rate Map* or 1
Maps). Ftah and Wlhnife
Wetlands Inventory Map*).
proprlato agendes to
proposed action to located ta or wm likely
affect a ftoodpialn or wetlands. If there la
the action may proceed without further
*et forth below.
m forty Pottle JvoMce-When It b appar-
ent that a proposed or potential agency
action ta likely to Impact a flondplahi or
wetlands, the public should be Informed
I by a Statement of I
to eaeeed three pace*. Thto Statement «haU
Include! II) The reaadns why the proposed
I ta or affect the
floodplata or wetlands: ill> a description of
significant faeta considered ta making the
i to locate ta or at feet the ftoodpialn
action; (III) a i
thepropo
(I) noodptata/WMtandt AiteumaU-U
the Agency determine* propoeed action la
located ta or affecta a '
(EA)or
(BIS) ta
prepared pursuant to 40 CFR part 0. the
floodplaln/wettond* assessment shall be
and shall be Included ta the EA or EH. In
all other ease*, a Aoodputa/ " *
be prepared.
of a description of
posed action, a discussion of Its effect on the
floodplaln/wetland*. and shall also
the alternatives considered.
(4) PttoHe Review of
proposed
lands wtv
i where an EA or OB ta prepared, the
.opportunity for public review will be nrovU-
edthrwigh the EU provision contained ta
40 CFR part. 0. ». or SB. where epproprt-
ate. In other eases, an equivalent public
notice of the tloodWaln/weUand* agtenv
ment ahall be made eontatent with the
public Involvement requirements of the ap-
plicable program.
(B) Minimi**.
there ta no practl
Ing In or affecting the floodplata or wet-
-If
i totoeat-
arda; (Kr) a description of the steps taken to
Hal harm to or within the
ftoodplaln or wetlands; and (») a statement
Indicating how the proposed action affecta
the natural or beneficial values of the flood-
Plata or wetland*. If the provision of 40
CFR part 0 apply, the Statement of Find-
toga may be Incorporated ta the final BIS or
ta the environmental assessment. In other
case*, notice should be placed ta the Pirn-
or other local medium and
copies sent to Federal. State, and local agen-
dea and other entitle* which submitted
comments or are otherwise concerned with
the ftoodptota/wetlands assessment. For
floodplata action aubject to Office of Man-
agement and Budget (OMB) Circular A-OB.
the Agency ahall send the Statement of
Findings to Slate and areawlde A-OB clear-
inghouse ta the geographic area affected. At
least IB working day* shall be allowed for
public and Interagency review of the State-
ment of Findings.
(1) 4«thorlaallon*AlppfoprMttoM-Any
requests for new authorisation or appro-
priation transmitted to OMB shall Include.
Findings. If1!! proposed actlonVrlll be located
In a floodplaln or wetlands.
- b. Lead agency concept To the maximum
eitent possible, the Agency ahall relay on
the lead agency concept to carry out the
provbton set forth ta section O.a of this ap-
pendix. Therefore, when EPA and another
Federal agency have rented action*. EPA
ahall work with the other agency to Identify
which agency ahall lake the lead In satlsfy-
i act forth under the NFIP and
must Include mitigation of advene Impacts
wherever feasible. Deviation from these re-
quirements may occur only to the eitent
NFIP standards are demontratod as Inap-
propriate for a given structure or facility.
(» flood Protection Weanm-lf newly
constructed structures or facilities are to be
located In a noodplaln. accepted floodproof
shall be undertaken. To achieve flood pro-
tection. EPA shall, wherever practicable.
elevate structures above the base flood level
rather than filling land.
(I) Restoration and PrejereoHon-As port
of any EPA phut or action, the potential for
restoring and preserving ftoodplaln and
wetlands so that their natural and benefi-
cial values can be realized must be consid-
ered and Incorporated Into the plan or
action wherever feasible.
(4) Properly Used ov Publfe-lf property
used by the public has suffered damage or ta
located In an Identified flood haaard area,
EPA shall provide on structures, and other
places where appropriate, conspicuous Indi-
cators of past and probable flood height to
enhance public knowledge of flood hazards.
(B) TT««t/er e/ KFA Property-When prop-
erty ta flood plain ta proposed for lease.
easement, right-of-way, or disposal to non-
Federal public or private parties. EPA ahall
reference ta the conveyance those uses that
are restricted under Federal. Stete and local
ftoodplaln regulation and attach other re-
striction to uses of the property aa may be
deemed appropriate.- Notwithstanding. EPA
shall consider withholding such properties
40 CFt Ch. I (7-l-«l tdmon)
PA!? 7IWHOBOIIMIMAIIOM M
ASttSTANCf MOM TOE ENVHON-
MBITAl MOICCI1ON AOCNCV
1.10 Purpose olthta part.
TIB Applicability.
1.M Responsible agency of fleers.
1.M Definitions.
1.30 General prohibition.
1.35 Specific prohibitions.
lie relat-
1.10 New contraction.
7.15 Transition plan.
eyi
1.80 Applicant*.
1.M Recipients.
1.00 Grievance pi
Isnds. the Agency shall act to i
tentlal harm to the floodplaln or wetlands.
The Agency shall also act to restore and
preserve the natural and beneficial values of
noodplaln and wetlanda a* part of the
analysis ol all alternative* under consider-
_ these procedural
thereby avoid duplication of efforts.
e. Additional floodptain management pro-
vitioni retail** to Federal proper!* and fa-
clllMea
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX E
EXAMPLE OF A RECORD OF DECISION
E-l
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
S
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
ition of a new prime farmland soil, the Grayrock soils, with
slopes of five percent or less. Zn 1991, these new soils comprised
56.2 percent of the 7,100 reclaimed acres compared to the 18.6
percent prime farmland soils prior to mining. This represented a
three-fold increase in prime farmland that can be directly attrib-
uted to mining activities. The EXS assessment concluded that re-
establishment of vegetation is technically feasible using the
"mixed spoil" alternative of overburden handling. The EXS also
stated that reclaimed soils not capable of sustaining the reveg-
etation species (native or non-native) should not be released from
bond by the Railroad commission of Texas (RCT) as a part of the
Office of surface Mining's delegated program requirements.
Alternatives for lignite transportation were evaluated. The types
of equipment considered included shovels, front-end loaders, back-
hoes, continuous surface miners, conveyors, haulage trucks, and
railroad. Based on anticipated mining conditions and production
requirements, TUMCO selected shovels, in combination with trucks
and the railroad, to transport the lignite to the power plant.
EPA evaluated alternatives for reclamation of mining activities in
consideration of the comments and technical input from the U.S.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS), the U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service
(USFW), the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), and others.
The proposed plan includes rough backfilling and grading, soil re-
construction of mixed overburden, grading and shaping, seedbed
preparation, and revegetation for grazingland and reestablishment
of wetland and bottomland hardwood habitats. Post-mining land use
will be, effectively, 100 percent pastureland, including 83 percent
monoculture grassland, 13 percent trees and shrubs, and four
percent ponds. EPA's assessment of this land use change recognized
the concerns of the USFW, TPWD and others and acknowledged that the
net loss or displacement of wildlife communities, followed by the
slow reestablishment of associated habitats constitutes a long-
term, major, adverse impact. Also, EPA's assessment recognized
that landowners may be adversely impacted by selecting coastal
bermudagrass, a high maintenance, non-native species, when native
species adapted to the area could be established and persist with
comparatively low management levels.
other areas of consideration included EPA's impact evaluation of
TUMCO's mining proposal and BPA's preferred alternative to issue
the NPDES permit. These involved not only the predicted effects of
the B-2 expansion but also the cumulative effects of TUMCO's total
mining operations on approximately 30,000 acres in Titus, Camp, and
Hopkins Counties. This evaluation included extensive review and
comment by interested Federal, State, and local agencies and
environmental groups and individuals, including the Titus county
Citizens an Endangered Species, inc. who, with other local resi-
dents, strongly opposed the B-2 mine expansion and requested that
EPA deny the MPDES permit.
E-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Kining operations will alter the topography, geology and soils on
approximately 6,174 acres during the life of the project, short-
term, adverse impacts on topography should be mitigated fey contem-
poraneous reclamation with no predicted irretrieveable commitment*
or long-term cumulative adverse impacts. Overburden removal will
permanently alter the geology and stratigraphic relationships of
individual strata, constituting an unavoidable, long-term, adverse
impact and irretrieveable commitment of resources, soils will be
impacted from increased bulk densities, reduced permeabilities and
altered textures. Cumulative effects include replacing approxi-
mately 30,000 acres of native soils with reconstructed mixed soils
following mining. EPA's assessment concluded land productivity
following mining was potentially beneficial for the short-term
based on the KCT's requirement for TDHGO to demonstrate revege-
tation "equal to or better" than original conditions. However,
since long-term, land use and productivity are ultimately the
result of the landowner's management* adverse impacts are probable.
Existing ground water flow and use patterns will be altered during
mining and complete resaturation may take from 12 to 48 years.
Vpon resaturation, the ground, water flow regime should be similar
to pre-mine conditions, but with increases in sulfate, total dis-
solved solids, iron and manganese concentrations. Degradation of
groundwater will decrease with distance, estimated to be within
2,000 feet from the mine. , Ground water flow conditions and the
localized area projected to experience water level declines from
dewatering and/or depressurization activities should preclude any
cumulative interaction between Monticello B-2 and other TOXCo
mining projects. Because TDKCO is responsible to replace the water
supply of an owner of .interest in real property who obtains all or
part of his or her supply of water for domestic, agricultural,
industrial or other legitimate uses from an underground or surface
source where the water supply has been affected by contamination,
diminution or interruption resulting from surface mining activi-
ties, ground water impacts were not considered major.
Local communities and area residents will be affected during short-
term and long-term operations. Construction and operation of the
proposed mine will cause increased noise levels, resulting in
periodic, minor or major, adverse impacts. The greatest impacts
are expected to occur at nearby sensitive receptors (e.g. Green
Hill Church, Itipley Church and Damascus Church) when mining
operations are very near the mine boundary. Increased noise levels
may also adversely impact residents, particularly at night, local
transportation networks will be adversely impacted from increased
traffic and road relocations. Increased demand for community
facilities and services will cause some adverse impacts, including
cumulative effects. Land values on adjacent or nearby properties
may decrease for the short-term from mining operations, but after
reclamation is complete, this impact is potentially reversible and
affected land values should increase again.
E-4
-------
NEPA REVEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FAOLTnES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Streams will be affected by flow diversions prior to and during
mining, adversely impacting baseflovs. increased turbidity,
sedimentation, and habitat losses are adverse impacts on aquatic
communities expected to result from mining activities. Water
discharges from surface water control structures and retention
ponds throughout the nine area are required to meet EPA's NPDES
permit limits established to maintain vater quality stream
standards. Downstream surface water supply sources are not
expected to be adversely impacted. TUMCO has agreed to replace
affected non-forested wetlands and jurisdictional waters on a one-
to-one ratio, and affected forested wetlands on a three-to-one
ration. .This wetlands mitigation plan, which was reviewed by EPA
in consultation with the U.S. Any Corps of Engineers (USCE) and
others as part of the Final EXS, has been accepted and made
effective by EPA as a part of TDMCO'a NPDES permit application.
Restoration of perennial and intermittent stream channels to, their
approximate longitudinal profile and cross-section, and estab-
lishment of riparian/bottomland hardwood vegetation, is a
technically achieveable goal requiring many years to be fully
reestablished following reclamation. Mitigation success will be
monitored in conjunction with SPA's KPDES permit and the USCE's
Section 404 permit.
Mining operations will cause particulate matter to be emitted,
including increased fugutive dust and vehicle emissions, resulting
in periodic and short-term impacts to ambient air quality. Also,
the relocation of overburden material in the reclamation of mined
areas will change the ground level emanation rate of radon. BPA's
evaluation, including comments from the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Resources and the Texas Department of Health, the TCCAES,
and others, concluded that the predicted increases in noise,
partieulates and radon do not pose a serious public health threat
or constitute a significant adverse impact to the general public.
However, the EIS did conclude the projected increases in noise
levels and partieulates will result in minor or major, adverse
impacts on local residents, depending on prevailing conditions such
as wind direction and lack of rainfall, the level of vtining
activities, and the sensitivity of the individual(s) affected.
the soeioeconemics of local communities will be affected. Direct
employment opportunities of approximately 60 construction workers
and about 300 permanent operators are predicted beneficial impacts.
In addition, indirect employment opportunities in local towns and
comranities from expanding business sectors are potential benefi-
cial effects. Population effects are projected to be minimal with
some immigration of construction and operation personnel, cumula-
tive effects are not expected to greatly exceed existing employment
and earning levels. School districts, community colleges and
county hospitals should benefit from increased tax revenues, which
would allow for capital improvements and the purchase of educa-
tional supplies and equipment, and could result in additional
cervices to residents of Titus County.
E-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
p. 5
Some cultural resources, including historic and areheological
sites, will be lost due to mining activities. However, EPA's
Programmatic Agreement, executed in compliance with Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act, will lessen these adverse
impact* through the planned survey, testing and/or mitigation of
significant sites (i.e. listed in or "eligible" for listing in the
isterl . These data gathering activities over the life
of the B-2 and other Monticello mine areas have the potential to
expand our knowledge of the history and prehistory of the affected
Within the 6,174 acre mine area, loss of terrestrial wildlife
habitats and displacement of wildlife communities, followed by the
slow reestablishment of "in-kind" habitats and communities, consti-
tute minor, short-term and major, long-term, adverse impacts.
However, the EPA determined, in consultation with the USFW, that
neither construction nor operation activities are likely to
adversely impact any listed endangered and threatened species or
habitats.
Decisions The EPA considered all the information gathered in the
HEPA review for this NPDES permit action, including the EZS
analyses, comments received on the Draft and Final EXSs, EPA's
responses to comments on the Draft and Final EXSs, input received
from the scoping meeting and public hearing, and other information
provided by interested parties during the EZS process. EPA
assessed the significance of the proposed project's predicted
individual and cumulative impacts in light of applicable Federal
and State regulatory statutes, programs, regulations, and permits.
.The EZS process has provided the information needed for EPA to make
it's permit decision. EPA has concluded there are no predicted
effects of such significant consequence, individually or cumula-
tively, that would justify denial of the HPDSS permit. All
practicable means to avoid or minimize significant environmental
harm have been adopted. This determination is based in part on the
combined efforts of Federal and State regulatory agencies since EPA
has no authority to enforce other agencies regulations. After
weighing the trade-offs from the EZS process, this ROD documents
EPA's conclusion that the predicted beneficial effects of the
project outweigh it's adverse effects, and that EPA has decided, in
balance of the overall public interest and agency's mission, to
issue the final NPDES permit to TOMCO for the construction and
operation of the Monticello B-2 lignite mine expansion project in
Titus County, Texas.
icial:
Regional Administrator E-6
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX F
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
F-l
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX F
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Action: -;.'...: :-' 11A signed decision by a responsible official resulting in an award, approval, notification,
,% ..-; -;"(}'..- ':-:':i|| cancellation, termination use, or commitment of federal funds or property.
.Council 4n--:: "'':
"Enviroiuneiital
this Executive Office of
Created by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, this Executive
die President, exercises an oversight function over the administration of NEPA; is
responsible for issuing regulations that implement the procedural provisions of NEPA; and
advises the President on environmental matters.
Categories of actions which do not individually, cumulatively over time, or in conjunction
with omer Federal, State, local or private actions have a significant effect on the quality of
the human environment and which, nave been identified as having no such effect based on
the requirements in 40 CFR §6.505, may be exempted from the substantive environmental
review requirements for this part Environmental information documents, environmental
assessments (EAs) or environmental impact statements (EISs) will not be required for
excluded actions. A CX is prepared in order to reduce paperwork, and to delay, if not
.
eliminate, unnecessary EA and EB preparation.
The impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when
agency (federalmA. non-federal) or person undertakes such actions. Cumulative impacts
can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a
period of time. __^_
Effec
?*fi'i
*?''::;:'
?*
r-t/.: * '
;'* "#!
Evaluations of the impacts of projects upon identified cultural resources. Criteria for
determining effect are specifically defined in 36 CFR 800. These procedures, which must be
followed by all federal agencies for projects involving cultural resources are outlines in 36
CFR 800. Effects include:
Direct effects, which are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place.
Indirect effects, which are caused by the action and are later in time or further removed
in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect effects may include growth
inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use,
population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural
systems, including ecosystems.
Effects and impacts as used in these regulations are synonymous. Effects includes
ecological (sum as the effects on natural resources and on the components, structures, and
functioning social, or health, whether direct, indirect, or cumulative. Effects may also
include those resulting from actions which may have both beneficial and detrimental
effects, even if on balance EPA believes that the effect will be beneficial.
§ Should be interpreted comprehensively to include the natural and physical elements and ||
the relationship for people with that environment. ||
A concise document prepared to provide sufficient data, evidence, and analysis to
determine whether an environmental impact statement (EB) or finding of no significant
impact (FNSI) is required for an action. Preparing a formal EA is not necessary in cases
where the EPA determines that a CX is appropriate or when an EIS will be automatically be
F-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Environmental
Impact Statement
A detailed, succinct document required of all Federal actions likely to have significant
effects on the environment. The document may be directly prepared if theproject is
presumed to have a significant impact or if an environmental assessment (EA) determines
that an ESS should be prepared. An EIS provides the public and decision makers with dear,
written documentation of possible environmental effects.
line of No=-;;.; ;. jl A document providing succinct evidence of why a proposed action will not have a
Off tCaitt Impact' 11 significant impact on me environment. An accepted FNSI nullifies the requiremen
l*Stt_' :""-- * II ,..:\^_:_..: C .~k -k.^WUB^MMMklKl £«MMM,«fr * fc_ &«UW MM t fdC\
' 11 ^Ij**********' ""K*"*1 xrat UK «*ivuwiiumu< «^*» «ww^f^w.u * *«*
|| submission or an environmental impact statement (HS).
JL
Major Federal ..:. j Includes actions with effects that may be major and that are potentially subject to Federal
I Action;..: ''.". . |l control and responsibility. Major reinforces,but does not have a meaning independent of
I -" '-.-':' '. ^significantly (defined in 40 CFR §1508.27) (also see Actions above).
Includes: a) avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action; b) minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation; c) rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the
affected environment; d) reducing or eliminating the impact over tame by preservation and
maintenance operations during the life of the action; and e) compensating for the impact by
replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.
National - "-..;
BitvuOnmentat :-:
Policy Art (NEPA):
Signed into law in 1970, NEPA has two major functions:
Establishes a government policy seeking to enhance the environment "by all practical
means" consistent with other national policies. An "action-forcing" provision directs
government agencies to prepare statements of the potential environmental effect of any
major" action considered by EPA and to study all practical alternatives
To establish the President's Coiindl on Enviraimental QuaUty (CEQ) which enhances
and encourages NEPA compliance and also advises the President on environmental
affairs.
Notice Of Intent
;'-- :- ? f .--.-.
^ »"'.:
' <-v * - f .. ' ; . .
A hrigf nrttifg placed in the Federal Register by EPA considering a major action informs
readers that an EB will be prepared to consider the consequences of a major Federal action.
The NOI describes the proposed action and possible alternatives, details the proposed
scoping process (i.e., location and time of meetings), and provides the name and address of
apoint of contact (POQ within EPA to answer questions about the proposed action and the
EB.
Pollution Prevention I EPA has defined pollution prevention as "source reduction" as that term is explained
-jr. v -..;'-' / ' f'. j,:/;" - f : f. II under the Pollution Prevention Act, as well as protecting natural resources through
: <;«', t £'.->..'/. II conservation or increased efficiency in the use of energy, water, or other materials.
|j Proponent:'.:-'"' j| The proposed action issuing agency. EPA is responsible for all NEPA compliance activities. |
Recold «f Decision
"
* s f' > f v , . *
,:
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
|j Scope?
|| The range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in an EIS (40 CFR 1508.25). ||
An early and open process of fostering participation and input from the public and other
agencies. Practiced to identify significant issues that should be addressed in an EIS, while
reducing the less relevant issues, scoping narrows the "scope" of an EIS's coverage to the
most important issues. (40 CFR §150/.3(c)) Scoping is a effective mechanism for exploring
alternatives to a proposed action or identifying significant impacts that may have been
initially overlooked. It also can be used to help determine whether an EIS is necessary for a
proposed action or whether an EA is sufficient. Furthermore, the scoping processprovides
an opportunity for affected parties to request time limits and page limits of an EIS (40 CFR
§150l!7(b); 1501.8).
Includes requiring considerations of both the context and intensity of an action. Context
means the significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts such as society as a
whole (i.e., human, national), the affected region, the affected interests, and the locality.
Both short-and long-term effects are relevant Intensity refers to the severity of the
beneficial or negative impact to the environment.
Refers to the coverage of general matters in broader environmental impact statements (such
as national program or policy statements) with subsequent narrower statements or
environmental analyses (such as regional or basin-wide program statements or ultimately
site-specific statements) incorporating by reference the general discussions and
concentrating solely on the appropriate when the sequence of statements of analyses is:
a) from a program, plan, or policy environmental impact statement to a program, plan, or
policy statement or analysis of lesser cope or to a site-specific statement or analysis; b) from
an environmental impact statement on a specific action at an early stage (such as need and
site selection) to a supplement (which is preferred) or a subsequent statement or analysis at
a later stage (such as environmental mitigation). Tiering in such cases is appropriate when
it helps EPA to focus on the issues which are ripe for decision and exclude from
consideration issues already decided or not yet ripe.
F-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX G
EXAMPLE OF A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
G-l
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Finding of No Significant Impact
Proposed EPA Region 9 Laboratory at the University of
California's Richmond Field Station
Richmond, California
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
November 16, 1990
G-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
FROM: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9
TO: All Interested Government Agencies and Public Groups
DATE: November 16, 1990
RE: FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT for the Proposed EPA Region 9
Laboratory at the University of California's Richmond Field Station
In accordance with the procedures for the preparation of environmental impact
statements, an environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared for the proposed U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 9 action below:
Official Project Name: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9,
Regional Laboratory
NPDES Number: None
State Clearinghouse
Number None
Applicant: The Wareham Property Group, Inc.
1120 Nye Street, Suite 400
P. 0. Box 929
San Rafael, CA 94915
415/457-4964
Contact: Dan Nourse
Project Location: City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, California
G-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Project Location
The project site is located at the University of California, Berkeley, field station,
which is in the south part of the City of Richmond on the shore of the Richmond Inner
Harbor in Contra Costa County. Richmond is bordered by El Cerrito and Albany to the
southeast and east, El Sobrante and Pinole to the north and east, Point Richmond to the
west, and the San Francisco Bay to the south (Figure 1).
Surrounding Land Uses*
The project site is located in an area dominated by industrial land uses located south
of Interstate Highway 580 (1-580; also known as the John T. Knox Freeway). The area was
formerly developed with heavy industrial land uses but these uses have been replaced in the
last several years by commercial, residential, and light industrial land uses. The recent
extension of 1-580 through this area has been a partial catalyst for the changes in land use.
The ISO-acre field station was acquired by the University of California in 1950.
Approximately 50 acres of field station are used for large-scale university research projects,
including the Sanitary Engineering and Environmental Health Research Laboratory, the
Forest Products Laboratory, and the Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
Avocet Way and a vacant field border the west boundary, and Heron Drive and a
second vacant field abut the south property boundary. The San Francisco Bay shoreline and
an extensive tidal salt marsh He 250-500 feet south of the site beyond a nideral field. The
remaining 100 acres of the field station can be characterized as undeveloped upland
property and shoreline marsh.
Project Site Description
Disturbed grasslands cover approximately 2.0acres of the project site. The remainder
of the site (approximately 1.1 acres) is either paved or developed with research and storage
facilities. Buildings 126,128,129,131, and 200 are within the project site boundaries (Figure
2).
G-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Need for and Purpose of the Proposed Laboratory
The new laboratory would consolidate the EPA Region 9 laboratory operations and
the management staff into one centrally-located facility. .EPA Region 9 currently operates
a laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada, which is distant from the laboratory's clients and
management staff in the Region 9 headquarters in San Francisco. In addition, Region 9 has
a field staging facility in Alameda, California. Most importantly, the new laboratory would
increase the communication capability between Region 9 headquarters and laboratory staff.
The purpose of the Region 9 laboratory (existing laboratory and future laboratory)
is to perform sample analyses in support of regional environmental monitoring and
enforcement efforts. The laboratory analyzes waters, animal and plant tissues, soils,
sediments, dust, oils, and solid and liquid wastes using prescribed EPA protocol.
Project Description
The project site encompasses 3.17 acres.' Site improvements would include
construction of the laboratory, a hazardous materials storage structure, a boiler building,
waste treatment and holding tanks, secured parking for EPA vehicles, and 38 parking spaces
for 25 staff and visitors. The EPA laboratory would consist of a single-story building with
45,855 gross square feet. The east side of the site would be reserved to accommodate an
anticipated 25-percent expansion of laboratory operations and future parking needs. At
buildout, the laboratory would house 33 employees. .(Figure 3).
Environmental Consequences and Conditions
Land Use and Policy Issues
The project components that have been developed thus far are relatively consistent
with the local plans and policies governing land development in the south Richmond area.
However, certain aspects of the site plan, such as the landscaping, have not yet been
developed. Thus, consistency with local landscape requirements is unknown at this time.
Mitigation measures 3i 1,3.2, and 3.3 have been developed to ensure that undetermined
project components are consistent with local plans and policies. Appendix A presents the
complete text of these conditions (i.e., mitigation measures), as well as all conditions
specified in the EA. G-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
Public Facilities and Services APRIL 1994
Existing waterlines serving the project site cannot maintain adequate water pressure
to fight fires at the facility. The sewer line serving the project site has capacity problems
during storm-events as a result of breaks in the line. These breaks appear .to be mostly
upstream of the field station. The site has a modest potential for flooding which could be
aggravated by a reduction in the acreage of permeable surfaces. Infrastructure
improvements and project construction techniques, however, can eliminate these impacts.
Conditions 4.1 through 4.13 have been developed to mitigate possible impacts on public
utilities and services.
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous 'materials presently used at the EPA's Las Vegas laboratory would be used
at the Richmond laboratory. Laboratory workers and visitors to the facility may be exposed
to hazardous materials in the event of an accidental spill or release. Mercury has been
identified in concentrations that exceed TTLC's for the chemical in surface soils in the
southeast corner of the proposed project site and on adjacent land; thus, future laboratory
staff and.construction workers could be exposed to mercury contamination during project
construction. These safety hazards would be relatively small, provided conditions S.I and 5.2
are incorporated into the project design. The University has agreed to implement these
measures and mitigate all contamination problems on the site and immediately adjacent land
prior to occupancy of the laboratory.
Circulation
Project implementation is expected to add roughly 76 daily vehicle trips to the
roadways in the vicinity of the project site, which is a relatively small number of trips.
Implementation of the proposed project would not affect the ability of AC Transit to provide
adequate service to the area, because bus route 10 has low ridership and is capable of
accomodating EPA employees, if necessary.
Air Quality
The following air quality impacts could result from the laboratory project.
o Dust generated by construction activities could affect adjacent research
operations that must filter intake air.
o Older structures on the project site may have asbestos-containing materials
(ACMs) that could be released into the atmosphere during demolition
activities.
o The 76 additional daily vehicle trips stemming from the project would increase
carbon monoxide levels in Richmond.
G-6
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
o The project could allow a minimal amount of hazardous material emissions to
escape,into the atmosphere through the fume hoods.
The air quality impacts are considered less than significant and would be further
reduced by implementing conditions 7.1,7.2, and 7.3.
Noise
Project construction is expected to expose adjacent land uses to noise levels of 60-80
dBA. Noise from operation of the ventilation system and landscape maintenance equipment
would generate additional noise. Added automobile trips, however, would generate an
insignificant amount of noise. The closest sensitive noise receptor to the project site is a
residential development under construction approximately 500 feet southwest of the site.
This distance is sufficient to reduce potential noise impacts to insignificant levels.
Biotic Resources
The project would require removal of 20-30 eucalyptus trees over 0.1 acres and would
displace birds using the eucalyptus. Two acres of mowed grassland would also be eliminated
and replaced by urban structures. Marginal foraging habitat (i.e., mowed grassland) forme
black-shouldered kite and the northern harrier, both species of concern, would be
eliminated. These impacts are considered to be less than significant because the vegetation
is mostly non-native and disturbed, and because the habitat is of marginal value.
Geology and Soils
The following impacts could result from the laboratory project.
o The high shrink-swell potential of Clear Take clay soils could affect
construction.
o Soils left exposed during the construction period could be subject to erosion.
o Ground shaking during an earthquake could potentially result in structural
damage, or a chemical spill and secondary effects of an earthquake, including
tsunamis and liquefaction, could affect the project.
These impacts are easily remedied with construction and project design mitigation
measures. Conditions 10.1 through 10.5 have been developed to mitigate possible project
impacts from geological hazards and erosion.
G-7
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Cultural Resources
A search of archival material and a field reconnaissance by qualified archeologists
revealed no evidence of historic or prehistoric use of the site. Since no cultural resources
were identified on the site, project implementation is not expected to affect such resources.
However, construction activities could disturb as-yet-unknown cultural resources. Condition
11.1 has been developed to mitigate possible impacts on unknown cultural resources.
Cumulative Impacts
The project would contribute minimally to cumulative sanitary sewer and landfill
impacts, infrequent flood events resulting from cumulative impacts on ground permeability
and drainage, traffic congestion, ozone and carbon monoxide air quality exceedances, and
loss of grassland for raptor foraging. The project's contribution to these impacts would be
minimal.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
Implementation of the project would irreversibly commit vacant land (less than 2.5
acres) to urban uses and would also irretrievably commit natural resources toward the
construction of the facility. These impacts are expected to be less than significant given the
project's small size.
Growth-Inducing Impacts
The EPA laboratory project is not expected to significantly induce growth as assessed
using standard growth-inducing criteria. In other words, the project would not extend urban
services or transportation facilities, nor is it expected to remove major obstacles to
development. Thus, the EPA laboratory's role in inducing growth in the south shoreline
area is expected to be minor.
Alternatives Considered but Found to be Infeasible
Two alternative site locations and a No-Project Alternative were considered and
found to be infeasible. The alternative site locations were partially vegetated with U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetlands. The project had the potential to affect
these wetlands. Thus, the alternative sites were in conflict with the EPA's desire to protect
wetlands. The No-Project Alternative was not capable of meeting the purpose and need of
the project to provide comprehensive laboratory services in the vicinity of the EPA Region
9 headquarters.
,G-8
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Preliminary Finding
The environmental review process confirmed that unavoidable significant
environmental impacts would not result from the proposed project Consequently, the EPA
has made a preliminary decision not to prepare an environmental impact statement. The
EPA reached this conclusion after reviewing the environmental assessment prepared by a
consultant to the EPA.,
The environmental assessment and other project information are available for public
review at the EPA Region 9 headquarters in San Francisco. Additional copies of the
environmental assessment may be obtained at cost by contacting this office.
Public and agency comments on this determination may be submitted 'to the EPA for
consideration within 30 calendar days from the date of this notice at 75 Hawthorne St.," San
Francisco, CA 94105, Mail Code P-3-1. No administrative action will be taken by the EPA
on the project before the end of the 30 day .period.
If there are any requests for additional information, please do not hesitate to call the
Laboratory Support Section at (415) 744-1491.
//. /fc. 10
Regional Administrator Date
Chief, Engineering, Planning and Architecture Branch Date
Facilities Management and Services Division
G-9
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Preliminary Finding
The environmental review process confirmed that unavoidable significant
environmental impacts would not result from die proposed project. Consequently, the EPA
has made a preliminary 'frfisHn not to pieyaie an envitoninmtai impyt «*g«gg<««^ The
EPA reached mis conclusion after reviewing die .environmental assessnent prepaied by a
constant to the EPA.
The cnvironinental assessment and other project information axe available for public
review at die EPA Region 9 headquarters in San Francisco, Additional copies of the
environmental assessnent may be obtained at cost by contacting this office.
Public and agency gnt"t"ytf on tins determination may be q**«**M>j to the EPA for
consideration within 30 calendar days from the date of this notice at 75 Hawthorne St., San
Francisco, CA 94105, Mail Code F-3-1. No administrative action win be taken by the EPA
on the project bcture me end of die 30 day period.
If there are any requests for additional infbnnation« please do not hesitate to can die
Laboratory Support Section at (415) 744-1491.
and Axdntectnze ^*fgt|** Dale
Facilities Managrmmf and Services Division
G-10
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APPENDIX A APWL 1994
CONDITIONS
Introduction
The following special conditions must be incorporated into the project description and
implemented as pan of the proposed project to ensure the project impacts are minimal.
The first list identifies measures which should be implemented to mitigate less-than-
significant impacts. The second list identifies measures which must be implemented to
mitigate potentially significant impacts.
Measures Recommended to Mitigate Less-Than-Significant Impacts
3.1 Assess Project Consistency with the Master Plan During Environmental Review of
the Master Plan, and If Project Plans Have Not Been Finalized, Include Applicable
Plan Policies and Design Standards into the Project
The environmental review of the field station master plan under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(presumably preparation of an EIR) should address the
consistency of the proposed EPA laboratory with the master plan. If the project is found
to be inconsistent with the master plan, include applicable master plan policies and design
standards into the project, provided project plans have not been completed.
3.2 Ensure Compliance with Zoning Ordinance Design Guidelines Prior to Project
Implementation
The EPA laboratory should comply with the landscaping, fencing, and sidewalk design
guidelines provided in the zoning ordinance prior to project implementation. The zoning
ordinance for the Special Industrial District is located in Appendix A of this report.
3.3 Ensure Compliance with Shoreline Conservation and Development Plan Landscaping
Requirements
The.EPA laboratory should comply with the following Shoreline Conservation and
Development Strategy (SCDS) landscaping requirements:
o Landscaping and open space should amount to 10-15 percent of the gross land
area.
o Five percent of the landscaped area should be devoted to open space.
G-ll
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Given these recommendations, the project should include approximately 16,000-24,000
square feet of open space with approximately 8,100 square feet devoted to usable open
space.
4.1 Evaluate Water Service Infrastructure and Project Demand to Determine if
Waterline Renovation Is Necessary, and if so, Make the Necessary Improvements
The University, along with the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), should
evaluate the capacity of the existing waterlines and the water demand of the proposed
project to determine the amount of upgrading needed. The 4-inch water line serving the
project site would probably require upgrading to meet fire flow requirements and increased
water demand stemming from this project, as well as the remainder of the proposed .research
center. If it is determined that upgrading of the waterline is necessary, the University should
implement measures to improve the water delivery system.
4.2 Investigate the Need to Upgrade and Expand the Onsite Sanitary Sewer System and,
if Needed, Implement Measures to Increase the Sanitary Sewer Trunk Line's
Capacity
The available sewer line capacity during storm events should be compared to the
amount of wastewater expected to be generated by the EPA laboratory to determine if the
seweriine has adequate capacity to serve the project throughout the year. The University
should work with the Richmond Municipal Sewer District to address this potential capacity
problem. The University should implement measures as needed to increase the sanitary
sewer trunk line's capacity. An example would be to insert a plastic slip line into the
seweriine to reduce groundwater infiltration. This measure is currently being implemented
by ICI to decrease leakage of wastewater from their sewer line into the environment.
4.4 Reroute Surface Drainage From Properties Adjacent to the Project Site to Drainages
Off the Project Site
Surface runoff carried by the swales and culverts crossing the project site should be
redirected to other drainages, such as the culvert that parallels Avocet Way.
4.5 Implement a Drainage Plan for the EPA Laboratory
. To manage runoff on the project site, the University should implement a drainage
plan for the-project site. The University appears to be planning the site drainage as
evidenced by the depiction of catch basins and drainage inlets on the laboratory site plan.
G-12
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
4.6 Continue to Evaluate Potential Landfill Sites APRIL 1994
Contra Costa County should continue to evaluate potential landfill sites.
4.7 Establish a Recycling Program at the EPA Laboratory and the Field Station
The EPA should implement a recycling program which would consist of
noncontaminated glass and paper recycling. Collection could be provided by the Richmond
Sanitary Service. The EPA Laboratory will recycle white paper, mixed paper, aluminum
cans, and glass as currently practiced in the EPA Regional office. The University of
California should consider a recycling program for the entire field station, which would
include the proposed research center. This mitigation measure -would not reduce the impact
to a less-than-significant level.
4.8 Implement the Mitigation Measures Suggested by the Richmond Fire Department
and Required by the EPA
The potential for health and safety risks to humans from'fire will be mitigated by the
following design features which have been requested by the EPA.
o Both buildings would be sprinklered. The sprinkler systems would be
hydraulically designed to meet National Fire Protection Association
Flammable and Combustible Liquid Code (NFPA) 13, local authority
standards and recommendations. The system would be approved by
a nationally recognized insurance company [EPA 1988, Section 7.19.7].
Fire protection for all laboratory rooms, computer rooms, and core
telecommunications closets would be provided through a dual sensing
pre-action dry pipe sprinkler system that would be controlled by a
deluge valve [U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1988, Section
7.19.5].
o Smoke alarms would be installed in the buildings [U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency 1988, Section 7.19.5].
o Manual fire alarms would be installed along the normal exit paths.
The alarm signal would automatically be sent to the Richmond fire
department in accordance with NFPA Standard 72B or 72C [U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency 1988, Section 8.8].
o Fire doors that are normally held open by electromagnetic devices
would be released automatically at the sound of the alarm [U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency 1988, Section 8.8].
o Portable fire extinguishers would be located in areas of high fire hazard
[U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1988, Section 5.19.1].
G-13
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
o The buildings would be constructed of permanent, non-combustible
construction [U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1988 Section
5.1.4].
The risk of serious fire should be further reduced by the installation of a new water
line with greater water pressure.
The building would be constructed with noncombustible material in accordance with
the uniform fire code.
4.9 Prepare a Business Plan for the Laboratory
A business plan addressing the use of hazardous materials at the laboratory must be
prepared and submitted to the Richmond Fire Department (and the Richmond Planning
Department) before a determination of fire hazard impact can be accurately made. The
planning department is expecting this information to be evaluated during the environmental
review process under CEQA. The business plan, as identified in the Hazardous Materials
Release Response Plans and Inventory Law of 1985, should include:
o design details of the facility (including floor plans, storage locations, and
facility description);
o an inventory of hazardous materials handled or stored at the facility;
o an emergency response^ plan, including notification and evacuation procedures;
o a training program in safety procedures and emergency response tor
hazardous materials designed for new employees, including annual refresher
courses; and
o precautions taken in the handling of compressed gases (Howard pen. comm.
University of California, Berkeley, Campus Planning Office, and EIP
Associates 1989).
4.10 Upgrade the Existing Waterline (as Needed) to Supply Adequate Water Pressure for
Firefighting
An evaluation of the water requirements of the laboratory, the capacity of the water
line, and firefighting water pressure needs should be conducted by the University, EBMUD.
and the Richmond fire department. If upgrading is needed to comply with fire flow
requirements the University would be responsible for the cost.
G-14
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FAOLnTES EPA 4841
...... o . cr APRIL l994
4.11 Install a Security System
The University should install a security system to guarantee the safety of all EPA
structures. The security system should be installed in all EPA structures and, if deemed
necessary by the EPA, the fenced parking area should also be protected with a security
system.
4.12 Reroute and Underground Utilities that Cross the Site, as Proposed in the Project
Description
The University intends to work with PG&E to reroute the existing overhead electrical
line traversing the project. This line would be rerouted to the southwest side of the project
site and undergrounded, as previously agreed to by the University and PG&E. Since the
electrical lines at the field station are owned by the University, it would pay for the cost of
rerouting and undergrounding.
4.13 Work with PG&E to Identify and Implement a Suitable Alignment for Rerouting the
Gas Line Crossing the Site, if Necessary
The University should work with PG&E to identify and implement a suitable course
for rerouting the gas line crossing the site, if ^necessary. The gas line should be
undergrounded with other utilities as proposed in the project description. Since the gas lines
are owned by the University, it should pay for the cost of rerouting and undergrounding, if
needed.
7.1 Reduce Dust at the Construction/Demolition Site with Water Trucks
Methods to reduce generation of dust (i.e.,total suspended paniculate matter) should
be employed during construction and demolition activities, particularly those activities
occurring near existing buildings.
7.3 Consult with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Concerning the
Potential Need for a Permit for Equipment That May Cause Air Pollution and for
the Potential Release of Hazardous Materials into the Atmosphere
The EPA should consult with the BAAQMD regarding the possible need for a
BAAQMD permit for the release of hazardous materials into the atmosphere.
10J Secure Soils Exposed During the Construction Period
Bare soils should be secured during the construction process. Construction should
occur during the dry season, if possible. _ . _
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
10 J Comply with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code and the University Policy
on Seismic Safety
Construction of the EPA laboratory should comply with the provisions of Title 24 of
the California Administrative Code, using the most recent edition of the California Uniform
Building Code for seismic standards. Title 24 gives specifications and design formulae to
reduce seismic hazards in new buildings. Project implementation should also comply with
the University Policy on Seismic Safety as administered by the Campus Seismic Review Board.
Design details should be consistent with recommendations by a California registered
engineering geologist to be retained by the developer (Campus Planning Office, University
of California, Berkeley and EIP Associates 1989).
10.4 Perform a Site-Specific Geotechnical Investigation of the Project Site
Onsite geotechnical investigations should be conducted under the direct supervision
of a California certified engineering geologist. The investigation should address anticipated
ground acceleration at the building site and the potential for structure displacement caused
by seismically induced vibration (Campus Planning Office, University of California, Berkeley
and EIP Associates 1989). Geotechnical investigations should be conducted at the project
site prior to construction to identify potential liquefiable soils, such as bay mud, sand, silt,
or clay. The engineering geologist should present recommendations for the abatement
of geotechnical hazards at the site, consistent with the provisions of the University Policy on
Seismic Safety (Campus Planning Office, University of California, Berkeley and EIP
Associates 1989).
11.1 Stop Work if Guttural Resources Are Revealed During Project Construction
Although no evidence of cultural resources' was identified during the field survey.
resources may potentially exist below the ground surface, particularly beneath placed fill
material. If cultural resources are observed during future construction activities, work should
be stopped at least 100 feet from the site until a qualified archeologist can inspect the
resource and determine further action, which may include testing, evaluation, and mitigation
(Hblman ft Auociatri 1989).
Measures Required to Mitigate Potentially Significant Impacts
4.3 Ensure the Project's Indoor Areas Are Above Potential Future Flood Levels.
Determine the Risk of Site Flooding, and Reduce This Risk to an Acceptable Level.
IT Deemed Necessary
The EPA, the University of California, and the project developer should ensure that
the indoor portions of the laboratory are elevated above potential flood levels resulting from
heavy rains and extreme high tides. Structures should be designed to withstand the
forecasted level and frequency of flooding. Chemical storage should be elevated above
G-16
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
forecasted flood levels. In addition, the University should determine the available capacity
of the field station's storm drainage system at the highest high tide. The University, in
coordination with the Richmond Public Works Department, should determine how much
additional capacity would be needed to prevent flooding of the laboratory project site during
storm events. This information should be used to determine the risk of flooding on the
project site. If the risk is considered high, the University should implement measures to
reduce the potential for flooding to an acceptable risk level.
5.1 Continue to Implement Safety Precautions Taken at the Las Vegas Laboratory and
Prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Plan
The EPA should continue to implement safety precautions taken at the Las Vegas
laboratory regarding requirements for fire extinguishers, use of fume hoods, storage of
hazardous substances and wastes, handling of chemical spills, and disposing of waste
materials. The EPA should also prepare a hazardous materials business plan as previously
suggested in this chapter in the section entitled "Hazardous Materials Management
Planning." This plan would outline types-and quantities of hazardous materials and wastes
to be located at the laboratory, compliance with Richmond's hazardous waste regulations,
evacuation procedures, and an employee training program for handling hazardous materials.
5.2 The University Will Assess the Extent of Contamination from Hazardous Materials
Throughout the Field Station and Shall Execute a Written Commitment to EPA to
Appropriately Remediate Any and All Contamination On or Immediately Adjacent
To the Project Site Prior to the Time that EPA Takes Occupancy of the Laboratory
The University is currently conducting a site evaluation of the entire Field Station.
to determine the extent of contamination from hazardous substances, contaminants, or
pollutants. In addition, the University is developing a plan to remediate the contamination
in the vicinity of the proposed Laboratory site, including all contamination resulting from or
associated with the area formerly used for mercury fulminate production. Prior to the time
that EPA and the Lessor sign a lease for rental of the Laboratory site, the University will
provide a written commitment to appropriately remediate said contamination, before EPA
occupies the site.
7.2 Remove All Asbestos-Containing Materials Prior to Demolition of Structures
The University should remove all asbestos-containing materials (if any exist on site)
prior to demolition of structures.
10.1 Use Deep Foundations to Mitigate for Expansive Soils, if Necessary
Deep foundations should be used, if necessary, depending on the shrink-swell
potential of the project site soils. G-17
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
10.5 Use Interior Design Techniques to Reduce the Potential for a Chemical Spill
The proposed structures should be designed to accommodate ground shaking
resulting from the maximum credible earthquake. Interior design features, such as fitting
shelving with rims and anchoring shelves to the floor to prevent objects (and shelves) from
falling, should be used.
G-18
------- |