United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Administration
and Resources Management
Washington, DC 20460
EPA 4841
April 1994
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 EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
OVERVIEW OF THE NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES MANUAL
Chapter 1 Introduction
Basis lor compliance 1
Roles and responsibilities I
NEPA Terms 1
J
Chapter 2 Planning
Compliance strategies I
Integration methods 1
Project requirements 1
\
4
Chapter 3 Procedure*
Decisionmaking process I
Decisionmaking criteria 1
Project procedures 1
Chapter 4 Documentation
Categorical Exclusions 1
Environmental Assessments 1
Environmental Impact Statements |
Chapter 5 Public Involvement I
Environmental Assessments 1
Environmental Impact Statements I
Figure Executive Summary - 1
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CONTENTS OF CHAPTERS
CHAPTER CHAPTER
TITLES NUMBERS
INTRODUCTION 1
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
APPENDIX 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
EID
EIS
EPA
EPAB
FEIS
FMSD
FOIA
FNSI
FR
NEPA
NOI
OARM
OE
OFA
ORD
PDEIS
POC
POR
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
11
-------
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
-------
NEPA 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
Categorical
Exclusion (CX);
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 and E1S preparation.
Environmental
Assessment (EA):
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
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 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 of possible environmental effects.
I Finding of No
Significant Impact
(FNSI):
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
submission or an environmental impact statement (EIS).
Notice of Intent
A brief notice placed in the Federal Register by EPA considering a major action informs
readers that an EIS 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
a point of contact (POO within EPA to answer questions about the proposed action and the
Record jot Decision
'
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 nas 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 PARAGRAPH
TITLES NUMBERS
Compliance Strategy 2-1
Project Level Compliance 2-3
FIGURE FIGURE
TITLES 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 FAdLITIES 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 1'Analysis:
Categorical
Exclusions
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NEPA REVIEW/PROJECT PLANNING INTEGRATION TIMELINE
(CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS')
NEPA Review
Process
Project
Plsnninci H
and Design
Timeline
EPA initiates Responsible g
preparation ol Official reviews tjj.
categorical exclusion g
exclusion application ||
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
Responsible ||
Official issues if
exclusion g
determination g
Detailed Design PC
Proceed with
selected action if
categorical
exclusion is
upheld
ase/x xv
3-6 Months*
Key: Project Planning Initiation % Start of Detailed Design £± Start ol Construction
' Represents average project planning/design time frame; 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
Project
Plonnlno
and Design
Timeline
b Evaluate
H potential impacts
Define IJ associated with
proposed g the proposed
action and j| ^ action, alternatives. ~*
alternatives g and mitigation, and
K prepare draft
H and final EA
Determine II p
significant ^ sek
^" impacts are ~^" F^
likely f
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
4- 12 Months*
roceed with
acted action if
ISI issued, or
xepere EIS
KtBKHWtKaSSgB
Detailed Design Phase
'( A
I
Key: Project Planning Initiation Start of Detailed Design ^. Start of Construction
' Represents average project planning/design Cmetrame, special circumstances may affect periods cited herein.
Figure 2-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NEPA REVIEW/PROJECT PLANNING INTEGRATION TIMELINE
fENVIRQNMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS')
NEPA Revlew
Process*
Prepare and
distribute
Notice ol
Intent
Conduct
activities
Idem ly and
evaluate
impacts and
alternatives.
Prepare and
lile draft
EIS
Public
review.
incorporating
comment
and filing of
final EIS
Mandatory
wailing
period.
lolowed by
issuance of
the ROD
Proceed
with
selected
action
Project
Planning
end Design
Timeline
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
Detailed Design Phase
// /*
8-20 Months*
Key: Project Planning Initiation Stan ol Detailed Design
Start ol Construction
' Does not include EA preparation lime.
** Represents average project planning/design timeframe, special circumstances may affect periods cried herein.
Figure 2-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
PROJECT LEVEL COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Assessment Factors
A, Air Pollution Control {including CFCs)
B. Drinking Water Management
C. Water Pollution Control
0. Hazardous Waste Management
E Solid Waste Management
F. PCB Management
G. Underground Storage Tank Management
H. Radioactive Materials Management
1. Light Emissions
A Natural Factors
1. Fish and Wildlife
2. Vegetation
3. Endangered Species
4. Water and Hydrology
5. Air and Noise
6. Physiography
7. Soils and Erosion
8. Historical, Archaeological.
Paleontologica) 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
Regulations
(A
.tr
J
I.
II. E
B
Length of Impact
1
|e
»
Permanent
(P)
Effect on Environment
'
Moderately
Adverse
Significantly
Adverse
m
Mitigation
Required
Regulatory Factors
nvironm
ental Facto
M
rs
i
1
mm
mm
Figure 2-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
PROJECT LEVEL COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET
Assessment Factors
(continued)
Regulations
en
D.
Standards
Length of Impact
£
|e
H!
Permanent
(P)
Effect on Environment
S
2
II
01 -§
Significantly
Adverse
Beneficial
Mitigation
Required
III. Sodoeconomic Factors
A, Residential Dwellings
B. Local Employment
C. Public Health and Well-Being
0. Relocation of Public Utilities
E Traffic and Congestion
F. Safety
G. Effect on Population Trends
H. Adverse Community Reaction to the Project
Figure 2-5A
-------
CROSS-CUTTERS
3RDER
'--'-
AUIVUN1STEKUW
: s-c- AGENCIES'/;''
JMPJJgMEN TING
REGULATIONS
Endangered Species Act, 16
U.S.C. 1531,£Lsejj.
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 CFR Part 402
50 CFR Parts 450,451.
452, and 453
The National Historic
Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C.
470, fiLsfifl.
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
Archeologisl, National Park
Service
36 CFR Part 800
The Wild and Scenic Rivers
Act, 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,
Subpart A
The Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C:
661
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 theseresourcgs^
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries
Service
None
Figure 2-6
-------
CROSS-CUTTERS f continued^
EXECUTIVE ORDER
Coastal Zone Management
Act, 16 U.S.C. Section 1451
et seq.
Coastal Barrier Resources
Act, 16 U.S.C. 3501 si SS&
The Wilderness Act, 16
U.S.C. 1131 fit sen
Farmland Protection Policy
Act, 7 U.S.C. 4201 si SSJJ.
Executive Order 11990-
Protection of Wetlands
Executive Order 1 1988 -
Floodplain Management
' J? s *. s ' .» ^ "V A>-» yhMj*jfe^"^ BBT iyyy^\ WT vx A mv& TTWT^ync^^yy s "* , ' *
j . A ^ jv i, / x- B[*aTfl(flV*HTu*ff/ mJl\^Jl TS/»I TJl* *d^( Jl JCrtlt * ' > *"
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-agricultural 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.
'-I ADMINISTERING
:};"', , 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
REGULATIONS"
15 CFR Part 930.
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, 219,
26 1 and 293
7 CFR 658
40 CFR Part 6,
Appendix A
40 CFR Part 6,
Appendix A
Figure 2-6A
P£
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FAdLITIES 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 hi 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 there 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
RaaponMto
Onoaltortw
anon appravad iv
dBpotton a» a
catagonou
aidutnn'
It ac»on atigua
lor a cawgonni
axchmonm
accordant* »m
40 CFD {6.107?
Enauretwtti*
docunwiuvon in
40 CFR (6.1071>
prtpnd
Gather Pertinenl Infomution
8>ckground
MirarPUfH
Prvviout S*Jd««
AvduMMipt
F«d«r«J. Sut*. and Locri R»gul«Mn»
Sit* Sufvtyt
Eittfing Inlrasviictuf* Plan»
Cmer genvral mlormabon
*c«on.S
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES
Review
Process
Stepl Step 2
Proponent Responsible
initiates _to. official ' j
proposed reviews
action; application &
submits background
tpplicalion data
StepS
Responstole
fc. official fc^ 1
issues CX
and >
documents
decision
Step 4
'roponenl
proceeds
vith action
^J
&S:X:Xx₯:XxX;X;xxXx:xXxX^
NEPA
Procedure
Timeline
Slept |
SttpJ
S»p«
«
WftrW'Xr^WW^'WWx*:^
Note:
Project
and Design "7
Jfmitllf^ 1
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
3-6 Months'
Detailed Design Phase"
" 1
Key: | Project Planning Initiation Stan ol Detailed Design ./V Start ol Construction
* Represents average project planning/design timelrame. special circumstances may aKecl periods cied herein.
~ Detailed design pnase may be started earlier provided that the alternative* to the preferred action are considered In the same detail.
X
j
1
§
1
^
{
1
1
|
1
1
1
:$
I
:5
*
1
1
j
I
1
|
1
IS&K&YjVS.'fttW&t&Wtf&.tW
"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
40CFR6.107(a)).
Figure 3-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES
Slept
Review _
*%£
proposed
action
r
Step?
30-day wa
and publi
comment
period
Step 2 Step 3 ' Step 4 Step 5 Step 6
Collect Responsible _
*- pertinent -*» official *- prePa'ean<1 -»». Determine .^ "not
b«*)imurrf daiarminas review draft significance significant.
d^nZw rTdlr andlinalEA «*»** »>»»*>
and analyze
I
Steps
Proceed
* ^ wfih action 8
: if applicable.
mitigation
and
monitoring
X
1
1
1
I
1
1
i£
1
i
BSX-.. A. ..-XV.-.A......V... -..-..,.,. , ....-., .-..-. .V. .....^...«v., S..SNV.V..>m
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Review
Process
Stepl
Proponent
Initiates
proposed
action
*
Step 2
Collect
background
data; review
and analyze
Steps
Determine
(ancipaled
significant
impacts)
t
Step 7
Prepare and
distribute
Draft EIS
-»-
StepS
Receive and
evaluate
comments
(45-day
period)
-
Step 9
Prepare final
EIS and
distribute to
other
agencies
and public
Step 4
Prepare and
pubSsn
Notice ol
Intent (NOI)
inFRand
AA/OE
-
Step 10
Receive and
evaluate public
comments
(30 -day
period)
**
Steps
Identity
alternatives
and
assessment
ol impacts
-*-
Sup 6
Initiate EIS
scoping
actVMes;
determine
significant
Issues
I
»»-
Step 11
Issue ROD,
Proceed
with action,
mitigation
and
ffionflonnQ
^K'i^-i^w&^&^wwx*::^^
NEPA
Procedure
Timeline
Supl ft^
S*P3 |
Step 10 ^^f
^
Project
Planning
and Design
Timeline
Conceptual and Preliminary Design Phase
Detailed Design Phase"
I
12-18 Months*
Kev: I Project Planning Initiation Stan of Detailed Design /^ Stan ol Construction
* Represents average project planning/design and construction start limelrame. special circumstances may allect periods cited herein.
* Detailed design phase may be started earlier provided that the altematrves to the preferred action are considered in the same detail.
*~ Average time to complete an EIS i&8-20 months, special circumstances may atlect periods cited 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 (see 40 CFR 6.105(b)]. An EID would not be necessary if EPA issues a CX [see 40 CFR
6.107(a)J.
Figure 3-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
EPA PROCESS REVIEW AND FILING REQUIREMENTS
Deviation
proposed
rule; 30 day public comment period prior to final rulemaking.
Environmental
Assessment
;::: ,
-------
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., EID, 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 (EID) 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 the EIS process.
a. Notice of Intent (NOIVNotice of Availability (NQA). 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 FEPA 3300-16 (5-92)1
(PAGE 1)
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington. DC 20460
^ CZDA National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review Form
\XdjTT for
Facility Alteration or Construction Project
1. General Information
Title of Project Project Number
Project Officer Name Title Phone Number
Location (city/county/state)
Part of EPA Facility. 'Yes or No' (if yes, give name of Facility)
II. Responsible Official for NEPA Review: (Name, Title, Phone Number)
Note: Responsible official must be the Chief, Engineering, Planning and Architecture Branch (EPAB), If EPAB approval Is required;
otherwise, responsible official will be whoever signs administrative action on protect (Lab Director, Regional Administrator, etc.)
III. Name, title, 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
| | | a Project is directed solely toward minor rehabilitation of existing facility, consists of functional
replacement of equipment, or consists of construction of new ancillary facility, adjacent or appurtenant
to existing facility.
1 1 1 b. Project does not directly or indirectly affect: cultural resource areas; endangered or threatened
species; or environmentally important natural resource areas, such as wetlands or tloodplains, etc. (if
responsible official requires additional detail on this criteria, see 40 CFR Part 6.107).
| | | c. Project does not cause significant public controversy and is cost effective.
| | | d Planned operations to be carried out at facility will not significantly impact the human environment.
If the answer to all of these questions is Tes/the project qualifies for a categorical exclusion. This form, when item IVA is completed and
item IVB is signed, will constitute a documented categorical exclusion determination under NEPA, and no further action is required to be
retained as part of the project file.
If the answer to any one of these questions is Wo, ' an environmental assessment (EA) is required (proceed 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
SPA 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 (NEPA) REVIEW FORM FOR FACILITY
ALTERATION OR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FEPA 3300-16 f5-92)1
(PAGE 2)
V. Environmental Assessment
In implementing this section, the Responsible Official may mark 'No* to any of the environmental impact statement (EIS) criteria where there are alternatives or
measures that will be undertaken to avoid significant environmental impacts. These measures must be documented.
A. Does the project meet any of the following criteria for preparation of an EIS? (Check "Yes or No')
Attach documentation to support Hams a through k. as appropriate:
Yes/No
| | | a. The project may significantly affect tha pattern and type of land use or growth and distribution of human population.
I I I b. The effects resulting from any structure or facility constructed or operated with respect to the proposed action may conflict with local, regional or
1 *' state land use plans or policies.
| | | c. The project may have significant adverse effects on wetlands, including indirect and cumulative effects, or any major part of a structure or facility
constructed or operated under the proposed action may be located in welands.
| | | d The project may significantly affect threatened and endangered species or their habitat identified by the Department of the Interior's list in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 6.302 or a Slate's list or may Involve a structure or a facility located in an endangered/threatened species habitat.
[ [ [ e. The project may directly cause or induce changes that significantly: (a) dsplace human populations, (b) alter the character of the existing
residential areas, (c) adversely affect a floodplain. (d) adversely affect significant amounts of important farmlands or agricultural operations on this
land.
I I I f. The project may directly, or through induced development, have a significant adverse effect upon local ambient air quality, noise levels, surface
water or groundwater quality or quantity, water suppfy, fish, shellfish, wildlife and their natural habitats.
[ [ [ g. The project may directly, indirectly, or cumulatively have significant adverse effects on parktands. preserves, other public lands or areas of
recognized scenic, recreational, archaeological, or historic value.
| | | h. The project may significantly affect the environment through the release of organisms, or radioactive, hazardous, or toxic substances.
| | | i. The project involves effects upon the environment which may be highly controversial.
I I I j. The project involves environmental effects which may accumulate over time or combine with effects of other actions to create impacts which are
1 ' ' significant
I | | k. The project involves uncertain environmental effects or unique environmental risks which may be significant
B. Summary of Need for Proposal and Reasonable Alternatives considered.
Attach a list and description of any reasonable alternatives and mitigation measures considered in the environmental review. The description of reasonable
alternatives must consider the environmental impacts of the alternatives.
Signature of official preparing environmental assessment, Title and Date
If tha answer is "No* to all of the EIS criteria, the Responsible Official shall issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) pursuant to 40 CFR Part 6.105(0.
accompanied by an environmental assessment Completion of this form with documentation, as appropriate, and signature of items V.C. and VI shall constitute the
FNSI and environmental assessment The Responsible Official shall allow for sufficient public review of the EA/FNSI before it becomes effective and shall not take
administrative action for af least 30 days after release of the FNSI. If the answer is "Yes" to any of the criteria under item V. an EIS should be prepared. If this is
the case, it is not necessary to sign and circulate this form. Instead, a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS should be published in the Efideial Reoiaer.
VI. Finding of No Significant Impact
In accordance with EPA's procedures at 40 CFR Part 6 for complying with the National Environmental Policy Act EPA has carried out an environmental review of
the following project identified in item I above.
An environmental assessment has been completed lor this proposed action. Based on this assessment, EPA has concluded that the proposed action will not result
in a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, an EIS will not be prepared.
Comments supporting or disagreeing with this decision may be submitted to EPA for consideration. Interested parties may contact the official identified in item V.C.
above. After evaluating the commends received, the Agency will make a final decision. No administrative action will be taken on the project for at least thirty (30)
days after release of this Finding of No Significant Impact.
Signature of Responsible Official. Title and Date
"EPA3300-16 (5-92)
Figure 4-1A
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION OVERVIEW
Purpose
Reviews potential
impacts of proposed
action.
Scope
Reviews
categorical
exclusion
criteria.
Content \-
Provides a
checklist to
determine
reasonableness
of a categorical
exclusion.
Public Participation
Project-specific CXs do
not provide for public
review; however, EPA
provides for public
review before adopting
new CX criteria.
Typical No. of V ^
Pages
NEPA Review for
EPA Facility
Alteration or
Construction Project
Form (Figure 4-1).
Figure 4-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
F.uipose
Summarizes
environmental impacts
to determine need for:
Further study
Mitigation
measures.
Scope
Reviews all
environ-
mental
impacts (e.g.,
natural and
human
impacts).
Content
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 No,
. of/Pages ;
10 to 50
pages of
text and
exhibits.
Figure 4-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OVERVIEW
Purpose
Notifies the
public of EA
results and
mitigation
plans.
Scope
Explains why
an action will
not have a
significant effect
on the natural
or human
environment.
Content
Explains why an action will not
have a significant effect on the
environment.
Describes mitigation measures
necessary to make the alternative
J
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.
Typical No.
of Pages
1 or 2 pages.
Figure 4-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
NOTICE OF INTENT AND NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OVERVIEW
Purpose
Announces to the
public that the EIS
process has begun
for a proposed
EPA action.
Scope
Presents basic
information about
the:
EIS;
Scoping
process.
' Content
Describes:
Proposed action and possible
alternatives
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
Typical No.
, of Pages i
1 page.
Figure 4-5
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EXAMPLE OF A NOTICE OF TNTENT
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, 401 M
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 (FQF)
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. TheFCFis
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
physically confine and control the associated
hazardous and toxic materials.
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 (EIS). 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 this
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 12-26-85; 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
Purpose
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.
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 prcparers
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
i
public hearing
on the DEIS
not earlier than
30 days after
issuance.
Provides for a
30-day review
period on the
FEIS prior to
issuance of the
ROD.
Typical No.
of Pages %
150 to 300
pages.
Figure 4-7
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
RECORD OF DECISION OVERVIEW
, Purpose
Announces the
Agency's
decision
regarding the
proposed major
EPA action.
Scope
States EPA's
decision and
the basis for
the decision.
Summarizes
the EIS
analyses and
selected
mitigation
measures.
<_ Content
Documents EPA's decision.
based on the DEIS, FEIS, and
all comments received.
States EPA's preferred
alternative.
Identifies alternatives
considered by EPA.
J
States whether all precautions
to avoid or minimize harm to
the environment were
considered, and if not, explains
why environmental
J
precautions were not taken.
Explains, when appropriate.
the mitigation monitoring
programs.
, ^Public .-
Participation .
Provides a
notice to
announce
the decision
to the
public.
Tjnn ;c
KUU IS
distributed
to all
persons
responding
to the DEIS
or FEIS and
those
requesting
it.
Typical No.
of Pages.
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 (FO1A).
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 of 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 other EAs 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
E
A
/
F
N
|
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
NEPA DOCUMENTS:
Comptolt
30
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DURING THE EISPROCESS
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
45-day minimum review/comment period
Conduct
Scoping
Meeting
30-day minimum before
public heaiing
Conduct
Pubic
DEIS
Briefing
3
-------
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 * - V
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
imeresied/affecied public
Establishes a convenient
location(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 1500-
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.
: . : Fact Sheets
Supplements other
measures (e.g., NO1)
Describes project status
Provides documentation
on EIS actions
Identifies reports available
for review and meeting
dates.
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 tie 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.
.. ;:.: ':'::x ; ".. : Formal and Inform a! Information Sessions
Serves as an EPA Conduct at or prior to major EIS
mechanism to report II milestones
progress and receive input . Ho]d on a formal (e g hearings)
from public. or ^ informa] 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 Part 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, in
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. 19751
B-l
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT
(42 USC 4321 et seq.; amended by PL 94-52, July 3, 1975; PL
94-83, August 9,1975)
Purpose
Sec. 2. (§4321) The purposes of this Act ate: 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 and 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
Environmental 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 ail
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 maintaining 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 government*, and other
concerned public and private organizations, to use all practica-
ble means and measures, including financial 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 amenities; and
(6) enhance the quality of renewable resources and
approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable
resources.
(c) The Congress recognizes that each person should
enjoy a healthful environment and each person has ja. 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 in 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,
(ii) any adverse environmental effects which
cannot be avoided should the proposal be implement-
ed,
(Hi) alternatives to the proposed action,
(iv) the relationship between local short-term
uses of man's environment and the maintenance and
enhancement of long-term productivity, and
(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commit-
ments of resources which would be involved in the
proposed action should it be implemented.
Prior to making any detailed statement, the responsible
Federal official shall consult with and obtain the comments
of any Federal agency which has jurisdiction by law or
special expertise with respect to any environmental impact
involved. Copies of such statement and the comments and
views of the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies,
which are authorized to develop and enforce environmental
standards, shall be made available to the President, the
Council on Environmental Quality and to the public as
provided by section 552 of title 5, United States Code, and
shall accompany the proposal through the existing agency
review processes;
B-4
-------
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, if:
(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 FACILITIES 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, maintaining, 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 II 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 the recommendations 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 H
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 FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
including, but not limited to, the air, the aquatic, including
marine, estuahne, 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 fulfilling human and
economic requirements of the Nation in the light of expected
population pressures; (4) a review of the programs and activities
(including 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
recommendations for legislation.
Sec. 202. (§ 4342) 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 carry 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 FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
(b) Notwithstanding section 3679(b) of the Revised Stat-
utes (31 U.S.C. 665(b)), the Council may accept and employ
voluntary and uncompensated 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-
tion 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 the purpose of determining
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 and 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 recommend to the President
national policies to foster and promote the improvement of
environmental quality to meet the conservation, social,
economic, health, and other requirements and goals of the
Nation;
(5) to conduct investigations, studies, surveys, re-
search, and analyses relating to .ecological systems and
environmental quality;
(6) to document and define changes in the natural
environment, including the plant and animal systems, and
to accumulate necessary data and 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,
and other groups, as it deems advisable; and
(2) utilize, to the fullest extent possible, the 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
agencies.
Sec. 206, (§4346) Members of the Council shall serve full
time and the Chairman of the Council shall be compensated at
the rate provided for Level II 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 Pay Rates (5 USC 5315).
Sec. 207. (§ 4346a) The Council may accept reimbursements
from any private nonprofit organization or from any depart-
ment, 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.
Sec. 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 are authorized to be appropriated
to carry out the provisions of this Act not to exceed $300,000 for
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 ENVRONMENTAL QUALITY.
REGULATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE PROCEDURAL
PROVISIONS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
(40 CODE OF REGULATIONS PARTS 1SOO-1S081
C-l
-------
o
PAtT 1SOOPUIPOSf, POLICY. AND
MANDATI
Sec.
1500.1 Purpose.
1500.1 Policy.
1500.3 Mandate.
1500.4 Reducing paperwork.
1500.5 Reducing deity.
ISOOJ Aiency authority.
AUTMO»ITT: NEPA. the Environment*!
Quality Improvement Act of 1970. u
amended (41 U.8.C. 4371 tt in».). tec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act. u amended (42 O.8.C.
7809) and E.O. 11514. Mar. 5. 1970. ai
amended by E.O. I IMl. May 94.1P71I
Sooner 43 FR 55990. Nov. 28. 1971. unless
otherwise noted.
»1500.1 Purpose.
(a) The National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) Is our basic nation-
al charter for protection of the envi-
ronment. It establishes policy, seta
oals (section 101). and provides
means (section 102) for carrylnc 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 the 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 officiate 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. Most Im-
portant. NEPA document* must con-
centrate on the Issues that are truly
significant to the action In question.
rather than amassing needless detail.
(c) Ultimately, of course. U 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
that 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.
11500.2 Policy.
Federal agencies shall to the fullest
extent possible:'
(al Interpret and administer the
policies, regulations, and public laws
of the United States In accordance
with the policies set forth In the Act
and In these regulations.
(bt Implement procedures to make
the NEPA process more useful to dec)-
slonmaken 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.
(c) 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.
Writing environmental Impact
statements In plain language
(| 1502.8).
(e) Following a clear format for envi-
ronmental Impact statements
(11502.10).
(f> Emphasizing the portions of Ihr
environmental Impact statement that
are useful to declslonmakers and the
public (II 1502.14 and 1502.15) and re-
ducing emphasis on background mate-
rial (I 1502.16).
ig) Using the scoping process, not
only to Identify significant environ-
mental Issues deserving of study, but
also to deemphaslze Insignificant
Issues, narrowing the scope of the en-
vironmental Impact statement process
accordingly (I 1501.7).
(h) Summarizing the environmental
Impact statement (I 1502.12) and cir-
culating the summary instead of t he-
entire environmental Impact state-
ment If the latter Is unusually long
11 1502.19).
(I) 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 (U 1S02.4 and 1502.20)
(j) Incorporating by reference
(< 1502.21).
(kl Integrating NEPA requirements
with other environmental review and
consultation requirements (I 1502.25).
(I) Requiring comments to be as spe-
cific as possible (| 1503.3).
im> 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
(| 1503.4(0).
in) Eliminating duplication with
State and local procedures, by provid-
ing for joint preparation (11900.2).
and with other Federal procedures, by
providing that an agency may adopt
appropriate environmental documents
prepared by another agency (11508.3).
(o) Combining environmental docu-
ments with other documents
<| 1506.4).
(pi 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).
(ql Using a finding of no significant
Impact when an action not otherwise
excluded will not have a significant
-------
o
Ui
effect on the human environment and
Is therefore exempt from require-
ments to prepare an environmental
Impact statement (11508.13).
143 PR S5990. Nov. 29. 1978: 44 FR 173. Jan.
3.19791
11500.5 Reducing delay.
Agencies shall reduce delay by:
(a) Integrating the NEPA process
Into early planning < 11501.2).
cb) Emphasizing Inter/agency coop-
eration before the environmental
Impact statement Is prepared, rather
than submission of adversary com-
ment* on a completed document
(11501.6),
(c) Insuring the swift and fair reso-
lution of lead agency disputes
(11S01.5).
(d) Using the scoping process for an
early Identification of what are and
what are not the real Issues (11501.7).
Establishing appropriate time
limits for the environmental Impact
statement process (2) and
1501.8).
(f) Preparing environmental Impact
statements early In the process
(11502.S).
(g) Integrating NEPA requirements
with other environmental review and
consultation requirements (11502.25).
(h) Eliminating duplication with
State and local procedures by provid-
ing for joint preparation (11908.2) and
with other Federal procedures by pro-
viding that an agency may adopt ap-
propriate environmental documents
prepared by another agency (11508.3).
(I) Combining environmental docu-
ments with other documents
(11508.4).
(J) Using accelerated procedures for
proposals for legislation (11508.8).
(kl Using categorical exclusions to
define categories of actions which do
not Individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human envi-
ronment d 1508.4) 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
(| 1508.13) and Is therefore exempt
from requirements to prepare an envi-
ronmental Impact statement.
BI500.« Agency authority.
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 with the purpose! 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 1501NIPA AND AOfNCY
F1ANNINO
Sec.
1501.1 Purpose.
1501.J Apply NEPA early In the proem.
1501.3 When to prepare an environmental
aneawnenl.
1501.4 Whether to prepare an environmen-
tal Impact talement.
15015 Lead atenelei.
1501.8 Cooperating agencies.
1501.7 Scoplns.
1501.8 TtmellmlU.
AUTHORITY: NEPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act o( 1970. aa
amended 142 U.8.C. 4371 el uq.t. ttc. 309 ol
the Clean Air Act. ai amended 142 U.8.C.
760*. and E.O. 11514 (Mar. S. 1970. at
amended by E.0.11991. May 24.1977).
Souacc 43 FR 55993. Nov. 29. I97S. unleu
otherwise noted.
RISOI.I Purpose.
The purposes of this part Include:
(a) Integrating the NEPA process
Into early planning to Insure appropri-
ate consideration of KEPA's policies
and to eliminate delay.
(b) Emphasizing cooperative consul-
tation among agencies before the envi-
ronmental Impact statement Is pre-
pared rather than submission of ad-
versary comments on a completed doc-
ument.
(c) Providing for the 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.
(e) Providing a mechanism for put-
ting appropriate time limits on the en-
vironmental Impact statement process.
I ISOI.Z Apply NEPA eirly In the procen.
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:
(a) Comply with the mandate of sec-
tion 102(2KA) to "utilize 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 1150T.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 aa provided by section
102(2)(E)of the Act.
(d) Provide for cases where actions
are planned by private applicants or
other non-Federal entitles before Fed-
eral Involvement so that:
(H 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.
(3) The Federal agency commences
its NEPA process at the earliest possi-
ble time.
9 1501.3 When In prepare an environmen-
tal aNNemimenl.
(a) Agencies shall prepare an envi-
ronmental assessment (t 1508.9) when
necessary under the procedures adopt-
ed by Individual agencies to supple-
ment these regulations as described In
| 1507.3. 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.
II1501.< Whether to prepare an environ-
mental Impart ttalemenl.
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:
(1) Normally requires an environ-
mental Impact statement, or
<2) Normally does not 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
(| 1908.9). The agency shall Involve en-
vironmental agencies', applicants, and
the public, to the extent practicable.
In preparing assessments required by
I lS08.9(a)(l).
(c) Based on the environmental as-
sessment make Its determination
whether to prepare an environmental
Impact statement.
(d) Commence the scoping process
(| 1501.7), If the agency will prepare
an environmental Impact statement.
(e) Prepare a finding of no signifi-
cant Impact (| 1508.13). If the agency
determines on the basis of the envi-
ronmental assessment not to prepare a
statement.
(I) The agency shall make the find-
Ing of no significant Impact available
-------
O
to the affected public as specified In
I 1S06.6.
(2) In certain limited circumstances.
which the agency may cover In IK 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:
(I) The proposed action Is. or Is 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 | IS07.3. or
(II) The nature of the proposed
action Is one without precedent.
HISOI.S UadagciwlM.
(a) A lead agency shall supervise the
preparation of an environmental
Impact statement If more than one
Federal agency either:
(1) Proposes or Is 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.
Federal. State, or local agencies.
Including at least one Federal agency.
may act as 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 Is disagreement among
the agencies, the following factors
(which are listed tn order of descend-
ing Importance) shall determine lead
agency designation:
(1) Magnitude of agency's Involve-
ment.
(2) Project approval/disapproval au-
thority.
(3) Expertise concerning the action's
environmental effects.
(4) 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
agenclea that a lead agency be desig-
nated.
(e) 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 has not
resulted within 45 days In a leau
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.
(f) A response may be filed by any
potential lead agency concerned
within 20 days after a request Is 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 It which
Federal agency shall be the lead
agency and which other Federal agen-
cies shall be cooperating agencies.
143 FR S5M2. Nov. M, Itlt. 44 PR 111. Jan.
3. It7ll
I1SCI.C Cooperating agtncln.
The purpose of this section Is 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:
11) Request the participation of each
cooperating agency In the NEPA proc-
ess at the earliest possible time.
(2) Use the environmental analysts
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 Utters request.
(b) Each cooperating agency shall:
(1) 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
(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-
quirement* In their budget requests.
(c) 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 Is the sub-
ject of the environmental Impact
statement. A copy of this reply shall
be submitted to the Council.
» 1501.7 Scoping.
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 the scoping process the lead
agency shall publish a notice of Intrm
(11508.22) In the FEDERAL REGISTER
except as provided In I 1507.3ie).
ia) As part of the scoping process
(he lead agency shall:
(I) Invite the participation of affect-
ed Federal. State, and local agencies,
any affected Indian tribe, the propo-
nent of the action, and other Interest-
ed persons (Including those who might
not be In accord with the action on en-
vironmental grounds), unless there is a
limited exception under 11507 3(c>. An
agency may give notice In accordance
with I 1506.6.
(2) Determine the scope
-------
p
§ 1501.8
12) Set time limits < I 1501.8).
(3) Adopt procedures under 4 1507.3
to combine Its environmental assess-
ment process with Its scoping process.
(4) Hold in early scoplnR meeting or
meetings which may be 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 sites.
(c) An agency shall revise the deter-
minations made under paragraphs (at
and (bl of this section IF substantial
changes are made later in I he pro-
posed action, or -If significant new cir-
cumstances or Information arise which
bear on the proposal or Its impacts.
g ISOI.H Time llmiia.
Although the Council has decided
that prescribed universal time limits
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 Intervals required by
I 1508.10). When multiple agencies are
Involved the reference to agency below
means lead agency.
la) The agency .shall set time 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.
ib)The agency may:
(1) Consider the following factors In
determining time limits:
(I) Potential for environmental
harm.
ill) Size of the proposed action.
HID State of the art of analytic tech-
niques.
(Iv) Degree of public need for the
proposed action, including the conse-
quences of delay.
(v) Number of persons and agencies
affected.
(vl) Degree to which relevant Infor-
mation Is known and If not known the
time required for obtaining It.
tvll) Degree to which the action is
controversial.
nill) Other lime limits imposed on
the agency by law. regulations, or ex-
ecutive order.
40 Cn Ch. V (7-1-86 Edition)
< 21 Set overall time limits or llmlu
for each constituent part of the NEPA
process, which may Include:
ill Decision on whether to prepare
an environmental Impact statement tlf
not already decided).
. and E.O. IISI4 (Mar. 5. 1*10. as
amended by E.O. IIMI. May 24. II17I.
Sooner 43 PR SSM4. Nov. 2*. Ida. unless
otherwise noted.
IISOM Purpoae.
The primary purpose of an environ-
mental Impact statement Is to serve as
an action-forcing device to Insure that
the policies and goals defined In the
Act are Infused Into the ongoing pro-
grams and actions of the Federal Gov-
ernment. It shall provide full and fair
discussion of significant environmen-
tal Impacts and shall Inform decision-
makers and the public of the reasona-
ble alternatives which would avoid or
minimize adverse Impacts or enhance
the quality of the human environ-
ment. Agencies shall focus on signifi-
cant environmental Issues and alterna-
tives and shall reduce paperwork and
the accumulation of extraneous back-
ground data. Statements shall be con-
cise, clear, and to the point, and shall
be supported by evidence that the
agency has made the necessary envi-
ronmental analyses. An environmental
Impact statement Is more than a dis-
closure document. II shall be used by
Federal officials In conjunction with
other relevant material to plan actions
and make decisions.
9 1502.2 Implementation.
To achieve the purposes set forth In
I IS02.1 agencies shall prepare envi-
ronmental Impact statements In the
following manner:
fa) Environmental Impact state-
ments shall be analytic rather than
encyclopedic.
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
(c) Environmental Impact state-
ments shall be kept concise and shall
be no longer than absolutely necessary
to comply with NEPA and with these
regulations. Length should vary first
with potential environmental prob-
lems and then with project size.
id) 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 102( 1) of the
Act and other environmental laws and
policies.
(e) The range of alternatives dis-
cussed In environmental Impact state-
ments shall encompass those to be
considered by the ultimate agency
declslonmaker.
(f) Agencies shall not commit re-
sources prejudicing selection of alter-
natives before making a final decision
(| 15081).
(g) Environmental Impact state-
ments shall serve as the means of as-
sessing the environmental impact of
proposed agency actions, rather than
Justifying decisions already made.
115023 Statutory requirements fur mate-
menu.
As required by sec. I02<2)(C) of
NEPA environmental Impact state-
ments (I IS08.I1) are to.be Included In
every recommendation or report.
On proposals (| 1508.23).
For legislation and (I I SOS. 11).
Other major Federal actions
(| 1508 18).
Significantly (| 1508.27).
Affecting(|l IS08.3. 15088)
The quality of the human environ-
ment (I 1508.H).
R IS02.4 Major federal actions requiring
Iht preparation of environmental
impact ilailcmenu.
(a) Agencies shall make sure the pro-
posal which Is the subject of an envl
ronmental Impact statement Is proper-
ly defined. Agencies shall use the cri-
teria for scope 111508.25) to determine
which proposalls) shall be the subject
of a particular statement. Proposals or
parts of proposals which are related to
each other closely enough to be. In
effect, a single course of action shall
-------
9
o\
be evaluated In a single Impact state-
ment.
(b) Environmental Impact state-
ments may be prepared, and are some-
times -required, (or broad Federal ac-
tions such as the adoption of new
ttency programs or refutation*
(| 1508.18). Agencies shall prepare
statements on broad action* so that
they are relevant to policy and are
timed to coincide with meaningful
points In agency planning and decl-
slonmaklng.
(c) When preparing statements on
broad actions (Including proposals by
more than one agency), agencies may
find It useful to evaluate the
proposal(s) In one of the following
ways:
(1) Geographically. Including actions
occurring In the same general location.
such as body of water, region, or met-
ropolitan area.
(2) Qenerlcally. 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 affect 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.
(d) Agencies shall as appropriate
employ scoping (| 1501.7). tiering
(11502.20). and other methods listed
In II 1500.4 and 1500.5 to relate broad
and narrow actions and to avoid dupli-
cation and delay.
IIS02.S Timing.
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 <| 1508.23) 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
serve practically as an Important con-
tribution to the decislonmaklng proc-
ess and will not be used to rationalize
or Justify decisions already made
(111500.2(0. 1501.2. and 1502.2). For
Instance:
(a) For projects directly undertaken
by Federal agencies the environmental
Impact statement shall be prepared at
the feasibility analysis (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 shall be com-
menced no later than Immediately
after the application Is received. Fed-
eral agencies are encouraged to begin
preparation of such assessments or
statements earlier, preferably Jointly
with applicable State or local agencies.
(c) 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 statement may follow preliminary
hearings designed to gather Informa-
tion for use In the statements.
(d) For Informal rulemaklng the
draft environmental Impact statement
shall normally accompany the pro-
posed rule.
I IMI.t InterdlMlaUnanr preparation.
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 art* (section 102(2)(A) of the
Act). The disciplines of the prepare
shall be appropriate to the scope and
Issues Identified In the scoping process
(| 1501.7).
I ISOJ.1 Pig* HmlU.
The text of final environmental
Impact statements (e.g.. paragraphs
(d) 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
pages.
ti
115*1.8 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 design arts.
IIM2.I Draft, final, snd supplemental
UttmtnU.
Except for proposals for legislation
as provided In I 1508.8 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 of this
chapter. The draft statement must
fulfill and satisfy to the fullest extent
possible the requirements established
for final statements In section
I02(2HC> 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 point*
In the draft statement all major point*
of view on the environmental Impact*
of the alternatives Including the pro-
posed action.
(b) Final environmental Impact
statements shall respond to comment*
as required In Part 150) of this chap-
ter. The agency shall discuss at appro-
priate point* 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.
(c) Agencies:
(1) Shall prepare supplements to
either draft or final environmental
Impact statements If:
(I) The sgency makes substantial
changes In the proposed action that
are relevant to environmental con-
cerns: or
11
(II) There are significant new cir-
cumstances or Information relevant to
environmental concerns and bearing
on the proposed action or Its Impacts.
(2) May also prepare supplements
when the agency determines that the
purposes of the Act will be furthered
by doing so.
(3) Shall adopt procedures for Intro-
ducing a supplement Into Its formal
administrative record. If such a record
exist*.
(4) Shall prepare, circulate, and file
a supplement to a-statement In the
same fashion (exclusive of scoping) as
a draft and final statement unless al-
ternative procedures are approved by
the Council.
IIS02.IO RKommtntftd form*!.
Agencies shall use a format 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 tor environ-
mental Impact statements should be
followed unless the agency determines
that there Is a compelling reason to do
otherwise:
(a) Cover sheet.
(b) Summary.
(c) Table of content*.
(d) Purpose of and need for action.
(e) Alternatives Including proposed
action (section* I02(2)(CXIII) and
102(2)(E)of the Act).
(f) Affected environment.
(g) Environmental consequences (es-
pecially sections 102(2KC) (I). (II). (Iv).
and (v) of the Act).
(h) List of prepare.
(I) List of Agencies. Organizations,
and persons to whom copies of the
statement are sent.
(J) Index.
(k) Appendices (If any).
If a different format Is used. It shall
Include paragraphs (a), (b). (c). (h). (I).
and (J). of this section and shall In-
clude the substance of paragraphs (d).
(e). (f). (g). and (k) of this section, as
further described In MI502.I1
through 1502.18. In any appropriate
lormat.
-------
11 SOI. 11 Corenheel.
The cover sheet shall not exceed one
page. It shall Include:
(t) A list of the responsible agencies
Includlnt the lead agency and any co-
operating agencies.
(b) The title of the proposed action
that Is the subject of the statement
(and If appropriate the titles of related
cooperating agency actions), together
with the StateCs) and county(les) (or
other jurisdiction if applicable) where
the action Is located.
(c> The name, address, and tele-
phone number of the person at the
agency who can supply further Infor-
mation.
(d) A designation of the statement as
a draft, final, or draft or final supple-
ment.
(e> 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. A. 7, 10. and 18).
HISOJ.1J Summit?.
Each environmental Impact state-
ment shall contain a summary which
adequately and accurately summarizes
ihe statement. The summary shall
stress the major conclusions, areas of
controversy (Including Issues raised by
agencies and the public), and the
Issues to be resolved (Including the
choice among alternatives). The sum-
mary will normally not exceed IS
pages.
1502.13 I'urpoM 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.
11502.11 Alternation Including the pro-
posed 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 (I 1502.15) and the Environ-
mental Consequences (11502.16). 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 basis for choice among options
by the declslonmaker 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.
(b) Devote substantial treatment to
each alternative considered In detail
Including the proposed action so that
reviewers may evaluate their compara-
tive merits.
(c) Include reasonable alternatives
not within the jurisdiction of the lead
agency.
(d) Include the alternative of no
action.
(e> 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.
1502.15 Affected environment.
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.
11501.lt Rmlronmental conteauentea.
This section forms the scientific and
analytic basis for the comparisons
under I 1502.M. It shall consolidate
the discussions of those elements re-
quired by sections I02I2HO (I). (II).
(Iv). and (v> of NEPA which are within
the scope of the statement and as
much of section 102(2MC)(III) 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 It be Implemented. This section
should not duplicate discussions In
11502.14. it shall Include discussions
of:
(a) Direct effects and their slgnlfl
cance< 11508.8).
(b) Indirect effects and their signifi-
cance (11508.8).
(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 I508.2.)
(d) The environmental effects of al-
ternatives Including the proposed
action. The comparisons under
11502.14 will be based on this discus-
sion.
(e) Energy requirements and conser-
vation potential of various alternatives
and mitigation measures.
(f) Natural or depletable resource re-
quirements and conservation potential
of various alternatives and mitigation
measures.
(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.
(hi Means to mitigate adverse envi-
ronmental Impacts (If not fully cov-
ered under 11502.14(0).
141 PR SSW4. Nov. M. 1*11; 44 PR 173. Jan.
3. I M«t
4 1502.17 I.UI of preparen.
The environmental Impact state-
ment shall list the names, together
with 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
(|| 1502.8 and 1503.8). 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.
II IS02.II) Appendix.
If an agency prepares an appendix
to 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
if 1502.21)).
ibl Normally consist of material
which substantiates any analysis fun-
damental to the Impact statement:
(c) Normally be analytic and rele-
vant to the decision to be made.
(d) Be circulated with the environ-
mental Impact statement or be readily
available on request.
ft 1502.19 Circulation of the environmental
impact utatement.
Agencies shall circulate the entire
draft and final environmental Impact
statements except for certain appendi-
ces as provided In 11502.18(d) and un-
changed statements as provided In
I I503.4IO. However. If the statement
Is unusually long, the agency may cir-
culate the summary Instead, except
that the entire statement shall br fur-
nished to:
-------
o
oo
organization, or agency which submit-
ted substantive comments on the
draft.
If the agency circulates the summary
and thereafter receives a timely re-
quest for the entire statement and for
additional time to comment, the time
for that requestor only shall be ex-
tended by at least 15 days beyond the
minimum period.
IIS01.20 Tierlni.
Agencies are encouraged 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 (| 1508.28).
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 slate where the
earlier document Is available. Tlrrlng
may also be appropriate for different
stages of actions. (Section 1508.28).
I IS02.2I Incorporation by referene*.
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 cited 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 time allowed for com-
ment. Material based on proprietary
data which Is Itself not available for
review and comment shall not be In-
corporated by reference.
H ISat.lt Incomplete or unavailable Infor-
mation.
When an agency Is evaluating rea-
sonably foreseeable significant adverse
effects 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 adverse Impacts Is essential to
a reasoned choice among alternatives
and the overall coats of obtaining It
are not exorbitant, the agency shall
Include the Information In the envi-
ronmental Impact statement.
(b) 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: (1) A statement
that such Information Is Incomplete or
unavailable: (2) a statement of the rel-
evance of the Incomplete or unavail-
able Information to evaluating reason-
ably foreseeable significant adverse
Impacts on the human environment:
(3) a summary of existing credible sci-
entific evidence which Is relevant to
evaluating the reasonably foreseeable
significant adverse Impacts on the
human environment, and (4) the 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 Is supported by credible scientif-
ic evidence. Is not based on pure con-
jecture, and Is within the rule of
reason.
(c) The amended regulation will be
applicable to all environmental Impact
statements for which a Notice of
Intent <40 CFR 1508.22) Is published
In the PCBCKAL RCCISTC* on or after
May 27. 1988. For environmental
Impact statements In progress, agen-
cies may choose to comply with the re-
is
qulremenu of either the original or
amended regulation.
ISl FR 1M1I. Apr. U. 1»MI
IIMt.il CMt-benefll anslrils-
If a coat-benefit analysis relevant to
the choice among environmentally dif-
ferent alternatives Is being considered
for the proposed action. It shall be In-
corporated by reference or appended
to the statement as an aid In evaluat-
ing the environmental consequence*.
To assess the adequacy of compliance
with section 102(2XB> of the Act the
statement shall, when a cost-benefit
analysis Is prepared, discuss the rela-
tionship between that analysis and
any analyses of unquantlfled environ-
mental Impacts, values, and amenities.
For purpose* of complying with the
Act. the weighing of the merits and
drawbacks of the various alternatives
need not be displayed in monetary
cost-benefit analysis and should not be
when there are Important qualitative
considerations. In any event, an envi-
ronmental Impact statement should at
least Indicate those considerations. In-
cluding factor* not related to environ-
mental quality, which are likely to be
relevant and Important to a decision.
I IK1I4 MttKoMogy ana1 Kltnlfflc acra-
mtf.
Agencies shall Insure the profession-
al Integrity. Including scientific Integ-
rity. of the discussions and analyse* In
environmental Impact statements.
They shall Identify any methodologies
used and shall make explicit reference
by footnote to the scientific and other
source* relied upon for conclusions In
the statement. An agency may place
discussion of methodology In an ap-
pendix.
1 ISM.tt EnTlronnwntal mte* and ton-
(a) To the fullest extent possible.
agencies shall prepare draft environ-
mental Impact statements concurrent-
ly with and Integrated with environ-
mental Impact analyses and related
surveys and studies required by the
FUh tad Wildlife Coordination Act (16
OM.C. Ml el seq.>. the National His-
toric Preservation Act of l»M (18
U.8.C. 470 et seq.). the Endangered
U
Species Act of 1973 (18 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.i. and other environmental review
lawa and executive orders.
(b) The draft environmental Impact
statement shall list all Federal per-
mit*, licenses, and other entitlements
which must be obtained In Implement-
Ing the proposal. If It Is uncertain
whether a Federal permit, license, or
other entitlement Is necessary, the
draft environmental Impact statement
shall so Indicate.
PART 150*COMMENTING
Sec.
130J.1 IiwIttRS comment*.
1901.2 Duty to comment
1(01.1 Specif Icily of comment*.
IS03.4 RetponM to comment*.
AontoHrr. NHPA. the Environment*!
Quality Improvement Act of |S?o. a*
amended (41 U.8.C. 4171 it K».». *ee. 101 of
the Clean Air Act ss amended (41 U.S.C.
760»>. and E.O. 11114 (Mar. I. 1*10. u
amended by C.O. UNI. May 14.19111.
Some* 41 FR 1SH7, Nov. If. 1*71. unJea*
othtrvlM noted.
I IM1.I Inviting eowawma.
(a) After preparing a draft environ-
mental Impact statement and before
preparing a final environmental
Impact statement the agency shall:
(1) Obtain the comment* of any Fed-
eral agency which has jurisdiction by
law or special expertise with respect to
any environmental Impact Involved or
which Is authorized to develop and en-
force environment*! standards.
(2) Request the comments of:
(I) Appropriate 8UU and local agen-
cies which are authorized to develop
and enforce environmental standards;
(II) Indian tribe*, when the effects
may be on a reservation: and
till) Any agency which has requested
that It receive statement* on action* of
the kind proposed.
Under Executive Order No. 12371. the
Office of Msnsgement snd Budget,
through its system of clearinghouses,
provide* a means of securing the view*
of State and local environmental agen-
cies. The clearinghouses may be used,
by mutual agreement of the lead agency
sod the clearinghouse, for securing
-------
n
vb
Stite and local reviews of the draft en-
vironmental Impact statements.
<3> Request comments from the ap-
plicant. If any.
(4) Request comments from the
public, affirmatively soliciting com-
ments from those persons or organiza-
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 11508.10.
I 1503.1 Duty lo comment.
Federal agencies with Jurisdiction by
law 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 11508.10. 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.
» IS03.J Specificity of comment!.
(s> 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.
(b) when a commenting agency criti-
cizes a lead agency's predictive meth-
odology, the commenting agency
should describe the alternative meth-
odology which It prefers and why.
(c) 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 tt 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.
(di 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 requirement* or concurrences.
11503.4 R«PORM to eommenU.
(a) An agency preparing a final envi-
ronmental Impact statement shall
assess and consider comments both In-
dividually 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:
(1) Modify alternatives Including the
proposed action.
(2) Develop and evaluate alterna-
tives not previously given serious con-
sideration by the agency.
(3) Supplement. Improve, or modify
Us analyses.
(4) Make factual corrections.
(S) 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.
(b) All substantive comments re-
ceived on the draft statement (or 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-
ment.
(c) If chances In response to com-
ments are minor and are confined to
the responses described In paragraphs
(a) (4) and (S) 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
< 1150J.I9). The entire document with
a new cover sheet shall be filed as the
final statement (| 1S08.9).
PART 1504fMDICKION MF»-
AIS TO THE COUNCIL OF ttO-
POifO FIDEIAL ACTIONS DETfl-
MINEO TO U CNVmONMENTAUY
UNSATUPACTOtr
8rc.
1504.1 Purpose.
IM4.* Criteria for referral.
1504 J Procedure (or rcfcmli and re-
iponK.
AmMoairr: NCPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act ol l»10. as
amended (41 U.S.C. 4311 el itm. sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act. as amended (4J U B.C.
T«0f>. and B.O. 11514 I Mir. 5. 1*70. M
amended by to.1IMI. May 34. IB77).
Soncc 43 FH MM*. Nov. J9. l»7i. unlcu
otherwise noted.
1504.1 PurpoM.
(a) This part establishes procedures
for referring to the Council Federal
Interagency disagreements concerning
proposed major Federal actions that
might cause unsatisfactory environ-
mental effects. It provides means for
early resolution of such disagree-
ments.
(b) Under section 308 of the Clean
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7600). 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 are 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 309 directs that the
matter be referred to the Council
(hereafter "environmental referrals").
(c) Under section 102(IMC) 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.
I INH.t Criteria for refeml.
Environmental referrals should be
made to the Council only after con-
certed. timely (as 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 Impact*, con-
sidering:
(a) Possible violation of national en-
vironmental standards or policies.
(b) Severity.
(c) Geographical scope.
(d) Duration.
(e) Importance as precedents.
(ft Availability of environmentally
preferable alternatives.
I IS04.3 Procedure for refrmli and re-
(a) A Federal agency making the re-
ferral to the Council shall:
(I) Advise the lead agency at the
earliest possible time that It Intends to
refer a matter to the Council unless a
satisfactory agreement Is reached.
(2) Include such advice In the refer-
ring agency's comments on the drift
environmental Impact statement.
except when the statement does not
contain adequate Information lo
permit an assessment of the matter's
environmental acceptability.
(3) 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 OS) 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.
(c) The re/erra) shall consist of:
(DA copy of the letter signed by the
head of the referring agency and deliv-
ered to the lead agency Informing the
lead acency of the referral and (he
reasons for It. and requesting that no
action be taken to Implement the
matter until the Council acts upon the
II
-------
p
o
referral. The letter shall Include a
copy of the statement referred to In
(c«2) of this section.
(2) A statement supported by (actual
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:
(I) Identify any material facts. In
controversy and Incorporate (by refer-
ence If appropriate) agreed upon facts.
(ill Identify any existing environ-
mental requirements or policies which
would be violated by the matter.
(Ill) Present the reasons why the re-
ferring agency believes the matter Is
environmentally unsatisfactory.
(Iv) 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.
(v) Review the steps taken by the re-
ferring agency to bring Its concerns to
the attention of the lead agency at the
earliest possible time, and
(vl) Olve the referring agency's rec-
ommendatlons as to what mitigation
alternative, further study, or other
course of action (Including abandon-
ment of the matter) are necessary to
remedy the situation.
(d) Not later than twenty-five (25)
days after the referral to the Council
the lead agency may deliver a response
to the Council, and the referring
agency. If the lead agency requests
more time and gives assurance that
the matter will not go forward In the
Interim, the Council may grant an ex-
tension. The response shall:
(1) Address fully the Issues raised In
the referral.
(2) Be supported by evidence.
O) Give the lead agency's response
to 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.
(f) Not later than twenty-five (25)
days after receipt of both the referral
and any response or upon being In-
formed that there «lll be no response
(unless the lead agency agrees to a
longer time), the Council may take
one or more of the following actions:
(I) 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-
mation.
UJ Determine that the Issue Is not
one of national Importance and re-
quest the referring and lead agencies
to pursue their decision process.
(5) Determine that 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' dis-
agreement* are Irreconcilable.
(S> Publish Its findings and recom-
mendation* (Including where appropri-
ate a finding that the submitted evi-
dence docs not support the position of
an agency).
(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 60 days to complete the actions
specified In paragraph if) (2). (3). or
(S) of this section.
(h) When the referral Involves an
action required by statute to be deter-
mined on the record after opportunity
for agency hearing, the referral shall
be conducted In a manner consistent
with ft U.8.C. &it(d> (Administrative
Procedure Act).
(43 PR 55HS. No*. ». 1*11: 44 FR (73. Jan.
J. IfWI
MIX 1505NiTA AND AOtNCV
DEdSIONMAKINO
See.
IMS.I Attncr decMonmaalna- procedure*.
ISOS.l Record of decision In caa«< requlrlnt
environmental Impact uatemenia.
1SOS.J Implementing the decUlon.
AOTHOSSTV: NEPA. (he environmental
Quality improvement Act of 1*70. at
amended (43 U.S.C. 4371 el tea>. MC. 30* of
the Clean Air Act. u amended 142 U.S.C.
7«0n and E.O. I ISM iMar. S. 1*70. as
amended by C.O. IIMt. May 14. it77i.
Sooner 43 FR $$». Nov. M. 1»1I. units*
otherwise noted.
I IMS I Agency deetolonmaklng eroee-
Agencles shall adopt procedures
(11507.3) to ensure that decisions are
made In accordance with the policies
and purpose* of the Act. Such proce-
dures shall Include but not be limited
to:
(a) Implementing procedures under
section 102(2) to achieve the require-
ment* of sections 101 and 102( I).
(b) Designating the major decision
point* for the agency's principal pro-
gram* likely to have a significant
effect on the human environment and
assuring that the NEPA process corre-
spond* with them.
(c) Requiring that relevant environ-
mental document*, comments, and re-
sponse* be part of the record In formal
rulemaklng or adjudlcatory proceed-
ing*.
(d) Requiring that relevant environ-
mental document*, 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 document* 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 (o the decision-
maker, agencies are encouraged to
make available to the public before
the decision Is made any part of that
document that relate* to the compari-
son of alternatives.
I IMS.l Record of tfrcblon In cam re-
quiring «n»lronm«nul Impact il«l«.
nwnla.
At the time of it* decision (11508.10)
or. If appropriate. Its recommendation
to Congress, each agency shall prepare
a concise public record of 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 to 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 of national
policy which were balanced by the
agency In making Its decision and
state now those considerations entered
Into Itt decision.
ic) State 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 IMS.) Implcmenllni Ih* declilon.
Agencies may provide for monitoring
to assure (hat their decisions are car-
ried out and should qo so In Important
cases. Mitigation (I I50S.2IO) and
other conditions established In the en-
vironmental Impact statement or
during Its 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, permit* or other approvals.
(b) Condition funding of actions on
mitigation.
(c) Upon request. Inform cooperating
or commenting agencies on progress In
carrying out mitigation measures
which they have proposed snd which
were adopted by the agency making
the decision.
(d) Upon request, make available to
the public the result* of relevant mon-
itoring.
10
-------
n
PART 150*OTHI* REQUIREMENTS
OF NEPA
See.
ISM.I Limitation* on action* during NEPA
proccu.
1J043 Elimination ol duplication with
Slate and local procedure*.
I509.J Adoption.
ISM.4 Comblnlnc documenu.
ISM s Asency reiporuiblllly.
ISM « Public Involvement.
ISM 7 Further fuldanee.
IJM.a Prapoasl* (or lecUistlon.
1308.9 Plllni requlremenu.
ISM 10 Timing of Mtncy action.
1904.11 Emenenclei.
ISM.ll Effective date.
Aimioiirr: NEPA. the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1*70. a»
amended (41 U.8.C. 4171 ft tea I. see. 309 of
the Clean Air Act. u amended i4» U.8 C.
HOB), and E.O. I ISM (Mar. S. 1*70. u
amended by E.O. 11S9I. May 24.1971).
Souacr 43 PR 68000. Nov. M. 1*71. unlen
othemUe noted.
IISM.I Limitation* on acllunt during
NF.PA proce**.
(ai Until an agency Issues a record of
decision as provided In I ISOS.2 (except
u provided In. parairaph (c) of this
section), no action concerning the pro-
posal shall be taken which would:
(I) Have an adverse environmental
Impact: or
(2) Limit the choice of reasonable al-
ternatives.
cb) If any agency U considering an
application from a non-Federal entity.
and Is aware that the applicant Is
about to lake 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 take 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 U 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:
ill 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
expenditure! not affecting the envi-
ronment (e.o. long leadtlme equipment
and purchase optional made by non-
governmental entitles seeking loan
guarantees from the Administration.
ISM.l Kllmlnallon of duplication wllh
Slat* and local procedure*.
(a) Agencies authorized by law to co-
operate with State agencies of state-
wide Jurisdiction pursuant to section
I02(2)(D) of the Act may do so.
(bl Agencies shall cooperate wllh
State and local agencies to the fullest
extent possible to reduce duplication
between NEPA and State and local re-
quirement*, unless the agencies are
specifically barred from doing so by
some other law. Except for cases cov-
ered by paragraph (a) of this section.
such cooperation shall to the fullest
extent possible Include:
(1) Joint planning processes.
<2J Joint environmental research
and studies.
(3) Joint public hearings (except
where otherwise provided by statute).
(4) Joint environmental assessments.
(c) Agencies shall cooperate with
State and local agencies to the fullest
extent possible to reduce duplication
between NEPA and comparable State
and local requlremenu. unless the
agencies are specifically barred from
doing so by some other law. Except for
cases covered by paragraph (al of this
section, such cooperation shall to the
fullest extent possible Include Joint en-
vironmental Impact statements. In
such cases one or more Federal agen-
cies and one or more Stale or local
agencies shall be Joint lead agencies.
Where State laws or local ordinances
have environmental Impact statement
requirements In addition to but not In
conflict wllh 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 better Integrale environmen-
tal Impact statements Into State or
local planning processes, statements
shall discuss any Inconsistency of a
proposed action with any approved
State or local plan and laws (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 the plan or law.
IISM.I Adopilon.
la) An agency may adopt, a Federal
draft or final environmental Impact
statement or portion thereof provided
that the statement or portion thereof
meets the standards for an adequate
statement under these regulations.
(b) 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 reclrculate It except as a
final statement. Otherwise the adopt-
ing agency shall treal the statement as
a draft and reclrculate It (except as
provided In paragraph (c) of this sec-
tion).
(c) A cooperating agency may adopt
without ^circulating the environmen-
tal Impact statement of a lead agency
when, after an Independent review of
the statement, the cooperating agency
conclude* 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 IS04. or when the
statement's adequacy Is the subject of
a Judicial action which Is not final, the
agency shall so specify.
1 ISM.4 Combining- documenu.
Any environmental document in
compliance with NEPA may tie com-
bined with any other agency docu-
ment to reduce duplication and paper-
work.
* IS06.S Agency reiponilbllllj.
(a) Information. If an agency re-
quires an applicant to submit environ-
mental Information for possible use by
the agency In preparing an environ-
mental Impact statement, then the
agency should assist the applicant by
outlining the types of Information re-
quired. The agency shall Independent-
ly evaluate the Information submitted
and shall be responsible for lu accura-
cy. If the agency chooses to use the In-
formation submitted by the applicant
In the environmental Impact state-
ment, either directly or by reference.
then the names of the persons respon-
sible for the Independent evaluation
shall be Included In the list of prepar-
ers l| 1902.17). It Is the Intent of this
paragraph that acceptable work not be
redone, but that II be verified by the
agency.
(b) Environmental ojjt|im
-------
o
to
come of (he project. If the document
Is prepared by contract, the responsi-
ble Federal official shall furnish guld-
ance .and participate In the prepara-
tion and shall Independently evaluate
the statement prior to IU approval and
take responsibility for lu scope and
contents. Nothing In this section Is 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
agency.
ttSM.! Public ln.oUtn.ent
Agencies shall:
Make diligent efforts to Involve
the public In preparing and Imple-
menting their NEPA procedures.
ib) Provide public notice of NEPA-
related hearings, public meetings, and
the availability of environmental docu-
ments so a* to Inform those persons
and agencies who may be Interested or
affected.
CD In all cases the agency shall mall
notice to those who have requested It
on an Individual action.
(2) In the case of an action with ef-
fects of national concern notice shall
Include publication In the PEDHUL
RtoisTca and notice by mail to nation-
al organizations reasonably expected
to be Interested In the matter and may
Include listing In the 102 Monitor. An
agency engaged In rulemaklng may
provide notice by mall to national or-
ganizations who have requested that
notice regularly be provided. Agencies
shall maintain a list of such organiza-
tions.
(3) In the case of an action with ef-
fects primarily of local concern the
notice may Include:
(I) Notice to State and areawlde
clearinghouses pursuant to EO12372.
the Intergovernmental Review Process1.
(II) Notice to Indian tribes wKen ef-
fects may occur on reservations.
(Ill) Following the affected Stale's
public notice procedures for compara-
ble actions.
(Iv) Publication In local newspapers
(In papers of general circulation
rather than legal papers).
(v) Notice through other local
media.
(vl) Notice to potentially Interested
community organizations Including
small business associations.
(vll) Publication In newsletters that
may be expected to reach potentially
Interested persons.
(vlll) Direct mailing to owners and
occupant* of nearby or affected prop-
erty.
(Ix) Posting of notice on and oft site
In the area where the action Is to be
located.
(c) Hold or sponsor public hearings
or public meetings whenever appropri-
ate or In accordance with statutory re-
quirements applicable to the agency.
Criteria shall Include whether there Is:
(1) Substantial environmental con-
troversy concerning the proposed
action or substantial Interest In hold-
Ing the hearing.
(2) A request for a hearing by an-
other agency with Jurisdiction over
the action supported by reasons why a
hearing will be helpful. If a draft envi-
ronmental Impact statement is to be
considered at a public hearing, the
agency should make the statement
available to the public at least IS days
In advance (unless the purpose of the
hearing Is to provide Information for
the draft environmental Impact state-
ment).
(d) Solicit appropriate Information
from the public.
(e) Explain In Its procedures where
Interested persons can get Information
or status reports on environmental
Impact statements and other elements
of the NEPA process.
(f) Make environmental Impact
statements, the comments received.
and any underlying documents avail-
able to the public pursuant to the pro-
vision* of the Freedom of Information
Act ( VAC. Ml), without regard to
the exclusion for Interagency memo-
randa where such memoranda trans-
mit comments of Federal agenelee on
the environmental Impact of the pro-
posed action. Materials 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 costs of re-
producing copies required to be sent (o
other Federal agencies. Including the
Council.
11
11 M«.7 Further gulasnee.
The Council may provide further
guidance concerning NEPA and lu
procedures Including:
(a) A handbook which the Council
may supplement from time to time.
which shall In plain language provide
guidance and Instructions 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 102 Monitor, notice
of:
(1) Research activities:
(2) Meetings and conferences related
to NEPA: and
(3) Successful and Innovative proce-
dures used by agencies to Implement
NEPA.
I IM4.S ProsoMli for ItiUlttlon.
(a) The NEPA process for proposals
for legislation (| 1908.17) 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 Is 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-
mlttal 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 Congr.es-
slonal debate. The statement must be
available In time for Congressional
hearings and deliberations.
(b) Preparation of a legislative envi-
ronmental Impact statement shall con-
form to the requirements of these reg-
ulations except as follows:
(1) There need not be a scoping proc-
ess.
(2) The legislative statement shall be
prepared In the same manner as a
draft statement, but shall be consid-
ered the "detailed statement" required
by statute: Provided. That when any
of the following conditions exist both
the draft and final environmental
Impact statement on the legislative
14
proposal shall be prepared and circu-
lated as provided by || IS03.1 and
1508.10.
(1) A Congressional Committee with
jurisdiction over the proposal has s
rule requiring both draft and final en-
vironmental Impact statements.
(II) The proposal results from s
study process required by statute
(such as those required by the Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act (18 V.S.C. 1271
et seq.) and the Wilderness Act UB
V.S.C. 1131 ft seq.)).
(Ill) Legislative approval Is sought
for Federal or federally assisted con-
struction or other projects which the
agency recommends be located at spe-
cific geographic locations. For propos-
als requiring an environmental Impact
statement for the acquisition of space
by the General Services Administra-
tion, a draft statement shall accompa-
ny the Prospectus or the 1Kb) Report
of Building Project Surveys to the
Congress, and a final statement shall
be completed before site acquisition.
Uv) The agency decides to prepsre
draft and final statements.
(c) Comments on the legislative
statement shall be given .to the lesd
agency which shall forward them
along with IU own responses to the
Congressional committees with Juris-
diction.
S|SM.f Filing requirement!.
Environmental Impact ststements
together with comments and responses
shall be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency, attention Office of
Federal Activities (A-104). 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. D.C. 10480.
Statements shall be filed with EPA no
earlier than they are also transmitted
to commenting agencies and made
available to the public. EPA shall de-
liver one copy of each statement to
the Council, which shall satisfy the re-
quirement of availability to the Presi-
dent. EPA may issue guidelines to
agencies to Implement lu responsibil-
ities under this section and I 1506.10.
« ISM.IO Tlmlnf of i«encr «rllon.
(a) The Environmental Protection
Agency shall publish a notice In the
FroriUL Rrcisien each week of the en-
vironmental Impact statements filed
-------
9
i-
Ui
during the preceding week. The mini-
mum time periods *et 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 11505.2 by a Federal agency
until the later of the following dates:
<1> Ninety (90> days after publica-
tion of the notice described above In
paragraph (a) of this section, for a
draft environmental Impact statement.
(2) 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 rule* on timing
may be made In the case 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 mry 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
(bM2) of this section may run concur-
rently. In such cases the environmen-
tal Impact statement shall explain the
liming 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 (bX2> of this sec-
tion and publish a decision on the
final rule simultaneously with publica-
tion of the notice of the availability of
the final environmental Impact state-
ment as described In paragraph (a) of
this section.
(c> If the final environmental Impact
statement Is filed within ninety (90)
days after a draft environmental
Impact statement Is filed with the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, the
minimum thirty (30) day period and
the minimum ninety (90) day period
may run concurrently. However, sub-
ject to paragraph (d) of this section
agencies shall allow not less than 45
days for comments on draft state-
ments.
(d> The lead agency may extend pre-
scribed periods. The Environmental
Protection Agency may upon a show-
Ing by the lead agency of compelling
reasons of national policy reduce the
prescribed periods and may upon a
showing by any other Federal agency
of compelling reasons of national
policy also extend prescribed periods.
but only after consultation with the
lead agency. (Abo see 11807.3(d>.)
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 time.
EPA may not extend It for more than
30 days. When the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency reduces or extends any
period of time It shall notify the Coun-
cil.
(41 FR 50000. Hov. M. iris: 44 PR (74. Jan.
3. l«7«)
IISW.II Emtrgtnele*.
Where emergency circumstances
make It necessary to take an action
with significant environmental Impact
without observing the provisions of
these regulation!, 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.
lisea.lt Eff*ctU*4at*.
The effective date of these regula-
tions Is July 30. 1979. except that for
agencies that administer programs
that qualify under section 102(2>(D> of
the Act or under sec. 104(h> of the
Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974 an additional four months
shall be allowed for the State 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
riled before the effective date of these
regulations. No completed environ-
mental documents need be redone by
reasons of these regulations. Until
these regulations are applicable, the
Council's guidelines published In the
FEDERAL Rmsrra of August 1. 1973.
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.
(b) NEPA shall continue to be appli-
cable to actions begun before January
1.1970. to the fullest extent possible.
MIT IS07-A0INCY COMPtlANCI
Bte.
15PT.I Compliance.
1507.J Agency capability to comply.
1507.3 Atency procedures.
ABTHOHITT: NEPA, (he Environment*!
Quality Improvement Act of 1(70, «*
amended CO U.8.C. 4171 ttM».I. we. 30* of
the Clean Air Act. as amended (41 U.8.C.
7<09>, and E.O. 11514 (Mtr. S. 1870. u
amended by E.O. IIMI. May 24.1977).
Sotiscc 41 PR MOO*. Nov. 3*. 1*71. unleu
otherwise noted.
1IStl.l 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 11507.3 to the re-
quirement* of other applicable laws.
I I507.S Agency capability to comply.
Each agency shall be capable (In
terms of personnel and other re-
sources) of complying with the re-
quirement* 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-
cle* shall:
(a) Fulfill the requirements of sec-
tion 102(2KA) of the Act to 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 declsloiunaking which may
have an Impact on the human environ-
ment. Agencies shall designate a
person to be responsible (or overall
review of agency NEPA compliance.
(b) Identify methods and procedures
required by section 102(2)(B) (o Insure
that presently unquantlfled environ-
mental amenities and values may be
given appropriate consideration.
(c) Prepare adequate environmental
Impact statements pursuant to section
102(2)(C> and comment on statements
In the areas where the agency has ju-
risdiction by law or special expertise
or Is authorized to develop and enforce
environmental standards.
id) Study, develop, and describe al-
ternatives to recommended courses of
action In any proposal which Involves.
unresolved conflicts concerning alter-
native uses of available resources. This
requirement of section 102I2XE) ex-
tends to all such proposals, not just
the more limited scope of section
102(2)(C)(III) where the discussion of
alternatives Is confined to Impact
statement*.
(e) Comply with the requirements of
section 102(2)(H) that the agency Initi-
ate and utnize ecological Information
In the planning and development of
resource-oriented projects.
(f) Fulfill the requirements of sec-
tions I02(2)(F). I02(2)(O),. and
102(2X1). of the Act and of Executive
Order 11514. Protection and Enhance-
ment of Environmental Quality. Sec.
2.
11507.3 Agency procedure*.
I a) Not later than eight months
after publication of these regulations
as finally adopted In the FEDERAL Rta-
ism. or five months after the estab-
lishment of an agency, whichever shall
come later, each agency shall as neces-
sary adopt procedures to supplement
these regulations. When the agency Is
a department, major aubunlu are en-
couraged (with the consent of the de-
partment) to adopt their own proce-
dures. Such procedures shall not para-
phrase these regulation*. They shall
con/lne themselves to Implementing
procedures. Each agency shall consult
with the Council while developing It*
procedures and before publishing
them In the FEDERAL REOISTEK for
comment. Agencies with similar pro-
grams should consult with each other
-------
and the Council to coordinate their
procedures, especially for programs re-
questing similar Information from ap-
plicants.' The procedures shall be
adopted only after an opportunity for
public review and after review by the
Council for conformity with the Act
and these regulations. The Council
shall complete Its review within 30
days. Once In effect they shall be filed
with the Council and made readily
available to the public. Agencies are
encouraged to publish explanatory
guidance for these regulations and
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 full compliance with
the purposes and provisions of the
Act.
(b) Agency procedures shall comply
with these regulations except where
compliance would be Inconsistent with
statutory requirements and shall In-
clude:
(1) Those procedures required by
|| 1501.2(d). 1502.9(0(3). 1508.1.
1506.8(t). and 1508.4.
(2) Specific criteria for and Identifi-
cation of those typical classes of
action:
(I) Which normally do require envi-
ronmental Impact statements.
(II) Which normally do not require
either an environmental Impact state-
ment or an environmental assessment
(categorical exclusions 111508.4)}.
(Ill) Which normally require envi-
ronmental assessments but not neces-
sarily, environmental Impact state-
ments.
(c) Agency procedures may Include
specific criteria for providing limited
exceptions to the provisions of these
regulations for classified proposals.
They are proposed actions which are
specifically authorized 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 statements
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 as
annexes. In order that the unclassified
portions can be made available to the
public.
(d) Agency procedures may provide
for periods of time other than those
presented In 11508.10 when necessary
to comply with other specific statuto-
ry requirements.
(e> Agency procedures may provide
that where there Is a lengthy period
between the agency's decision to pre-
pare an environmental Impact state-
ment and the time of actual prepara-
tion, the notice of Intent required by
I 1501.7 may be published at a reason-
able time In advance of preparation of
the draft statement.
FAIT !50»TtRMINOIOOY AND
INDEX
Sec.
ISM.I Termlnoloc*.
15087 Act.
15081 Affecttni.
1SOB.4 CatttorleaJ exclusion.
1508.5 Cooperating agency.
ISM.* Council.
15081 Cumulative Impact.
I508.S Effect*.
1508.9 Environmental uwument.
1508.10 Environmental document.
1S08.11 Environmental Impact statement.
15081} Federal (feney.
IS08.I1 Plndlns of no (IsnlMcant Impact.
1308.14 Human environment.
150815 Jurisdiction by law.
1508 IS Leadafencv.
150817 Legislation.
1508.18 Major Federal action.
1508.19 Matter.
150810 Mltlntlon.
1508.JI NEPAproeoa.
1508.32 Nolle* of Intent.
1508.23 Proposal.
1508.24 Referring agency.
1508.25 Scope.
1508.28 Special expertUe.
IS08.27 Significantly.
1508.28 Tlerlnt..
AuTMoatrr: NEPA. (he Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970. ai
amended (42 U.B.C. 4311 el MO. I. MC. 308 of
the Clean Air Act. ai amended (42 U.S C.
7808). and E.O. 11514 iMar. 3. 1970. at
amended by E.0.11991. May 24. 1977).
Sooacc 43 PR 58003. Nov. 29. 1978. unleat
otherwlae noted.
27
fl I50M.I Terminology.
The terminology ol this part shall
be uniform throughout the Federal
Oovemment.
11598.2 Act.
"Act" means the Nstlonal Environ-
mental Policy Act. as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321. et seq.) which Is also re-
ferred to as "NEPA."
11588.3 Affecting.
"Affecting" means will or may have
an effect on.
11508.4 Categorical ricluilon.
"Categorical exclusion" means a cat-
egory of actions which do not Individ-
ually or cumulatively hsve a signifi-
cant effect on the human environment
and which have been found to have no
such effect In procedures adopted by a
Federal agency In Implementation of
these regulations (| 1507.3) 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 stated In
I 1508.9 even though It 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.
11598.5 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) for legislation or other 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 I 1501.6. 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.
18
«I.VM.« Ciiunrll.
"Council" means the Council on En
vironmental Quality established by
Title 11 of the Act.
I ISOH.7 Cumulative Impact.
"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 of 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.
1ISOM grrecii.
"Effects" Include:
(a) Direct effects, which are caused
by the action and occur at (he same
time and place.
(b) Indirect effects, which are caused
by the action and are later In time or
farther removed in distance, but are
still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect
effects may Include growth Inducing
effects and other effects related to In-
duced changes In trie pattern of land
use. population density or growth rale.
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 (such as the effects
on natural resources and on the com-
ponents, structures, and functioning
of affected ecosystems), aesthetic, his-
toric, cultural, economic, social, or
health, whether direct. Indirect, or cu-
mulative. Effects may also Include
those resulting from actions which
may have both beneficial and detri-
mental effects, even If on balance the
agency believes that the effect win be
beneficial.
(1598.9 environmental aiuument.
'Environmental assessment":
(a) Means a concise public document
for which a Federal agency Is responsi-
ble that serves to:
(1) Briefly provide sufficient en-
dence and analysis for drterrmnlnx
-------
n
whether to prepare an environments!
Impact statement or a flndlnc of no
significant Impact.
(2) Aid an agency's compliance with
the Act when no environmental
Impact statement Is necessary.
(3) Facilitate preparation of « stau-
ment when one Is necessary.
(b) Shall Include brief discussions of
the need for the proposal, of alterna-
tives as required by section 102(2)(E>.
of the environmental Impacts of the
proposed action and alternatives, and
a lilting of agencies and persons con-
sulted.
11$09.10 Environmental document.
"Environmental document" Includes
the documents specified In 11508.9
(environmental assessment), ItSOS.ll
(environmental Impact statement).
11108.13 (finding of no significant
Impact), and I 1508.22 (notice of
Intent).
I IMS. 11 Environmental Impart itate-
menl.
"Environmental Impact statement"
means a detailed written statement as
required by section lOJ(JMC) of the
Act.
« 1508.11 Federal «x«nc)r.
"Federal agency" means all agencies
of the Federal Government. It does
not mean the Congress, the Judiciary.
or the President. Including the per-
formance of staff functions for the
President In his Executive Office. It
also Includes for purposes of these reg-
ulations States and units of general
local government and Indian tribes as-
suming NEPA responsibilities under
section I04(h) of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1914.
I IS08.I3 Finding of no ilmlflcanl Impact.
"Finding of no significant Impact"
means a document by a Federal
agency briefly presenting the reasons
why an action, not otherwise excluded
(| 1508.4). will not have a significant
effect on the human environment and
for which an environmental Impact
statement therefore will not be pre-
pared. It shall Include the environ-
mental assessment or a summary of It
and shall note any other environmen-
tal documents related to It
(11S01.7(*H8». If the assessment Is In-
cluded, the finding need not repeat
any of the discussion In the assess-
ment but may Incorporate It by refer-
ence.
I IM8.II Human environment.
"Human environment" shall be In-
terpreted comprehensively to' Include
the natural and physical environment
and the relationship of people with
that environment. (See the definition
of "effects" (|1808.B>.) This means
that economic or social effects are not
Intended by themselves to require
preparation of an environmental
Impact statement. When an environ-
mental Impact statement Is prepared
and economic or social and natural or
physical environmental effect* are
Interrelated, then the environmental
Impact statement w(U discuss all of
these effects on the human environ-
ment.
I&OS.IS Jurisdiction by liw.
"Jurisdiction by law" means agency
authority to approve, veto, or finance
all or part of the proposal.
IISM.lt Uad agency.
"Lead agency" means the agency or
agencies preparing or having taken
primary responsibility for preparing
the environmental Impact statement.
I ISM.lt l^siilsikm.
"Legislation" Includes a bill or legis-
lative proposal to Congress developed
by or with the significant cooperation
and support of a Federal agency, but
does not Include requests for appro-
priations. The test for significant co-
operation Is whether the proposal la In
fact predominantly that of the agency
rather than another source. Drafting
does not by Itself constitute significant
cooperation. Proposals for legislation
include requests for ratification of
treaties. Only the agency which has
primary responsibility for the subject
matter Involved will prepare a legisla-
tive environmental Impact statement.
» ISOt.ll Major Federal action.
"Major Federal action" Includes ac-
tions with effects that may be major
and which are potentially subject to
Federal control and responsibility.
Major reinforces but does not have a
meaning Independent of significantly
(11508.27). Actions Include the cir-
cumstance where the responsible offi-
cials fall to act and that failure to act
Is revlewable by courts or administra-
tive tribunals under the Administra-
tive Procedure Act or other applicable
law as agency action.
(a) Actions Include new and continu-
ing activities. Including projects and
programs entirely or partly financed.
assisted, conducted, regulated, or ap-
proved by federal agencies: new or re-
vised agency rules, regulations, plans.
policies, or procedures: and legislative
proposals III 1506.8. 1508.17). 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 1972. 31 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.. with no
Federal agency control over the subse-
quent use of such funds. Actions do
not Include bringing judicial or admin-
istrative civil or criminal enforcement
actions.
(b) Federal actions tend to fall
within one of the following categories:
(1) Adoption of official policy, such
as rules. regulations, and Interpreta-
tions adopted pursuant to the Admin-
istrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C. 551 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 programs.
(2) Adoption of formal plans, such as
official documents prepared or ap-
proved by federal agencies which
guide or prescribe alternative uses of
federal resources, upon which future
agency actions will be based.
(3) Adoption of programs, such as a
group of concerted actions to Imple-
ment » specific policy or plan: system-
atic and connected agency decisions al-
locating agency resources to Imple-
ment a specific statutory program or
executive directive.
(4) Approval of specific projects.
such as construction or management
activities located in a defined geo-
graphic area. Projects Include actions
approved by permit or other regula-
tory decision as well as federal and
federally assisted activities.
10
8 ISOH.U Mailer.
"Matter" Includes tor purposes ot
Part 1504:
(a) With respect to the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency, any proposed
legislation, project, action or regula-
tion as those terms are used In section
30B(a> of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7609).
(b) With respect to all other agen-
cies, any proposed major federal
action to which section 102I2XC) of
NEPA applies.
* I50M.JO MllltMlon.
Mitigation" Includes:
is) Avoiding the Impact alloRether
by not taking a certain action or parts
of an action.
Describe the agency's proposed
scoping process Including whether.
when, and where any scoping meeting
will be held.
ic) State the name and address of a
person within the agency who can
answer questions about the ptoposed
action and the environmental Impact
statement.
-------
n
i>
ON
IISM.Z1 Propoul.
"Proposal" exists at that state In
the development of an action when an
aiency subject to the Act hu a foal
and la actively preparing to make a de-
elflon on one or more alternative
meant of aecompllihlnt that goal and
the effects can be meaningfully evalu-
ated. Preparation of an environmental
Impact statement on a proposal should
be timed (11502.5) 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.
IIM8.ll Rchrrint fcncy.
"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.
IIS08.M Scop*.
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 In relation-
ships to other statements (II1S02.20
and 1508.28). To determine the scope
of environmental Impact statements.
agencies shall consider 3 types of ac-
tions. 3 types of alternatives, and 3
types of Impact*. They Include:
(a) Actions (other than unconnected
single actions) which may be:
(1) 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 bails for
evaluating their environmental const-
quencles together, such as common
timing or geography. An agency may
wish to analyze 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: (1)
No action alternative.
(2) Other reasonable courses ol ac-
tions.
(3) Mitigation measures (not In the
proposed action).
(c) Impacts, which may be: (1)
Direct; (1) Indirect: (3) cumulative.
JIS08.M SHdal tif*rtU*.
"Special expertise" means ststutory
responsibility, agency mission, or re-
lated program experience.
IIMS.tr Significantly.
"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 Interest*.
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) /nfenitty. 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:
(1) Impacts that may be both benefl-
clal and adverse. 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
areas.
(4) The degree to which the effects
on the quality of the human environ-
ment are likely to be highly controver-
sial.
(S) 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 eltecu 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-
sources.
(9) 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 ol
1973.
(10) Whether the action threatens *
violation of Federal. State, or local law
or requirements Imposed for the pro-
tection of the environment.
(4] FR 96003. Nov. 1». 1»7S; 44 FR «1«. Jan
3. 19791
11501*8 Tiering.
"Tiering" refers to the coverage of
general matters In broader environ-
mental Impact statements (such as n»-
tlonal program or policy statements)
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 ihe
general discussions snd concentrating
solely on the Issues specific to the
statement subsequently prepared
Tiering Is appropriate when the se-
quence of statements or analyses Is:
(a) Prom 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 an
early stage (such as 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.
-------
-Cento
o
I Ml I
IMI II IMIM
IMII. IMII
IMKM IMM* IMI>
MI I0» IMI II
HIMIi
i Mil
IMIIM IMri
IMM
Ml. IM»
mi.
HIM. imi
IMIMM IMI4.
IMIIM IMII.
M'IMX IMItMl
HI MM IMI I*.
IMIH
MIMKU |MIM»
IMIIM IMI IMM.
iMHWOt IM4IM
IMIIM IMIIM
U4M IMMt ,._
IMKM IM'IM -~ - -
iWMLIMtl
IMI Ma
IM4 *. IMS IIM
IMKM IWBMI. IMt«
IMtM. IMII. IM)l
im> IM»< (MM
IMI IIM
IMIIM IMIIM
IMIIM IMI Ml
IMI*. IMUMIl
mi. IMS. IMIIM.
>»MMt«MI
IMIB
'Mil IMI MM. IMIM*.
IMKM IMIIMM
IMII, IM«tl
HKM. IMUIg.
IMI num. n»m.
IMI* IMI.
IMII. Mil. IMII.
MIX MIC IMtH
W« Mil. IMM.
IMI. IMtW. IMIII
Mill. Ml II. IMI M.
Mill. Mtl«.IMtlt.
HttV IMIII. tIMII,
Min. iiout iMin
MIH. IMUt.
Ml UK IMII. IM4H
IMtW. IMtH IMUHL
MO '
MOM IMI. uotott
IMI IM«M IMKIl
Mill IMU1 IMI U
MM I
IMII
IM4O.IMH
IMIIM)
MOIJMM. IMI IMIl
MIJMA IMI I
IMI MM IMUM
IMI It
IMIfM
MtUMIir
IMII
IMI M« IMU
IMII
IM»lt
IMIIM IMIIW, 'Mil
IMI4 IMIf. IMIt
IMII IMUMM
IMI MX 'MIX '«-
ml). IMI IIM
U
locnaSuu
INO»Continued
! ISC04M
I IMI Jionn.
! IMI9M)
IMI Mel.
IM09H4
IMI XH.
UNO rxtoii ««on
Mafconot itfllonc PioaorvaMn
Act
I nipmi ol HMon.
MMdlvAcHn
NtPA PlOCOlO
OM«C.CUI«A.|9
PuUkc Hoowi And V
190* U IM* II
IMII 190*11
19001
I9MI 1904». I9M1.
I SO* il
IMtM
I9MHCI
IMil 190110
1909*0 IS091
I90IM
iMnrnmi
iMimn
iy>7 loioi IM; u
I90»H
IMI Jim
IMI' 190'Mol. IMIII
15031
!90**lbK2t 1904 ri£l
ISO* II
two«u iwurei IMII
190* 1*111
I9004M 19014 IWJJO
190*11
19014 l9MI*ni
ISM I*
IM>4
I90IIW4I
190* 1KI
IMI««
IMI*
19001 IMI I.
IM4 I
istjiam. IMI 13
SOI i. IMI*
IMI 14.
1903 IIM3I.
IMII
INDEXContinued
Record 0* 0*cr»on
R**ponto *B ConvMM*
Rtfll Ciocv*c««en Adm«»
SCMXMC ACCUKV
SCOM
SUM *nd AlOMMdo DiOrmg.
hOUM*
SUM ond LOCM
SUM and local F^c«l A«.
Irtlonco Acl
SuRWWV
UllnVOCI Sutomanlt
I*HO 01 COMOMI
tacrmotooxol DovaiopflioM
19041 IM4I IM4)
iMIHol
IM4 I. IM4I 1904 3
19031
IM*I|«
I9004IW.
IMI4|d)
IM*I
I9MN
IM04II). IM33
IMI 4laH». IM3 I
I9004IKI.
IMI IMKII IMI U»
IMI 9WI 'VII llaHt)
IMIXct. IM2IHCI
1901II. IMI II
190? 10(0
IMI 4KH3)
IMII
IMOSHI. I Ml
IMI 'mm IMI i
IMI 4. 1M9 9
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
APPENDIX D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ON
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
(40 CODE OF REGULATIONS PART 6)
D-l
-------
EnvtrMMMittal Protoctiwi Af*ncy
15.7 Waiver of fee.
Waivers of the full tuition fee may
be granted on a limited basis. Each
waiver request must be Justified and
considered by cognitive EPA units on:
(a) Severity of the pollution problem
In the area In which the applicant em-
ployee Is working; Cb) bona-flde admin-
istrative or legal constraints of the ap-
plicant agency to pay the reduced fee;
a.rt J-AsMMlnsj MM I
far Mwl
6.600 Purpose.
6.601 Definitions.
6.602 Applicability.
6.603 Limitation* on actions during envi-
ronmental review process.
6.604 Environmental review proceu.
6.808 Criteria for preparing EISs.
6.606 Record of decision.
6.607 Monitoring.
6.1001 Purpose and policy.
6.1002 Applicability.
6.1003 Definitions.
6.1004 Environmental review and
ment requirements.
6.1006 jLead or cooperating agency.
6.1006 Exemptions and considerations.
6.1007 Implementation.
Ammix A TO PA«T 6arATUorr or P»o-
CDoaES on pLoonrum MAHAomxT AMD
Wrrutma Paoncnon
Atrraoirrr: Sees. 101. 102. and 103 of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1668
(43 U.S.C. 4331 el »e».>; also, the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations dated
Nov. 2*. 1876 (40 CPR part 1500).
Sotrscc 44 PR 64177. Nov. 6. 1876. unless
otherwise noted.
EDITOSIAL NOTE Nomenclature changes
affecting part 6 appear at 80 PR 28315. June
25. IMS.
Subporf AOvnamrl
16.166 Parpose and policy.
The National Environmental
Act of 1969 (NEPA). 42 U.8.C.
40 CFI Oi. I (7-1.91
4321 et see., as Implemented by Execu-
tive Orders 11514 and 11901 and the
Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) Regulations of November 39.
1978 (43 PR 55978) requires that Fed-
eral agencies Include In their decision-
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 action*, and
restore and enhance environmental
quality as much as possible. The Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency CEPA)
shall Integrate these NEPA factors as
early In the Agency planning processes
as possible. The environmental review
process shall be the focal point to
assure 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 '.akes
Into account the EIS exemption* set
forth under section 51 Hex 1) of the
Clean Water Act (Pub. L. 92-500) and
section 7(cX 1 ) of the Energy Supply
and Environmental Coordination Act
of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-319).
(b) This part establishes EPA policy
and procedures for the Identification
and analysis of the environmental Im-
pacts of EPA-related activities and the
preparation and processing of EISs.
66.161 Definitions.
(a) Terminology. All terminology
used In this part will be consistent
with the terms as defined In 40 CPR
part 1508 (the CEQ Regulation)!). Any
qualifications will be provided In the
definitions set forth in each subpart of
this regulation.
(b) The term CEQ Reputation*
means the regulations Issued by the
Council on Environmental Quality on
November 29. 1978 (see 43 PR 65978).
which Implement Executive Order
11991. The CEQ Regulations will often
be referred to throughout this regula-
tion by reference to 40 CPR part 1500
flat.
-------
Envfc
mtal P
A|Mcy
The tenn environmental review
menu the process whereby an evalua-
tion to undertaken by EPA to deter-
mine whether a proposed Agency
action may have a significant Impact
on the environment and therefore re-
quire the preparation of the E18.
(d) The term environmental Infor-
mation document means any written
analysis prepared by an applicant.
grantee or contractor describing the
environmental Impacts of a proposed
action. This document will be of suffi-
cient scope to enable the responsible
official to prepare an environmental
assessment as described In the remain-
Ing subparts of this regulation.
(ft) 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.
C.I02 Applicability.
(a) Administrative action* 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.
(1) Subpart A sets forth an overview
of the regulation. Section «.102(b) de-
scribes the requirements for EPA leg-
islative proposals.
(2) Subpart B describes the require-
ments for the content of an EIS pre-
pared pursuant to subparU E. F. O. 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. G. H. and 1.
(4) Subpart D describes the public
Information requirements which must
be undertaken In conjunction with the
environmental review requirements
under subparts E. F. O. H. and I.
<5) Subpart E describes the environ-
mental review requirements for the
waatewater 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 (NPDES) permits
8*. 101
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 facilities
and facility renovations by the
Agency.
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) Application to ongoing activi-
iie*-U> General The effective date
for these regulations is December 5.
1079. 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. 1979. 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 16.
1979. However, for facility plans begun
before December 16. 1979. 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 S4I77. Nov. 8. 1079. ms amended at 47
FR 0829. Mar. 8. 19821
§6.103
Bt.103 Rwpontlbllltlea.
(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
Is 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.
(2) Offlce of External Affairs duties
include: (I) Supporting the Adminis-
trator In providing EPA policy guid-
ance and assuring that EPA ol flees 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.
(Iv) Coordinating the training of per-
sonnel Involved In the review and
40 CHI Ch. I (7-1-91 idltlen)
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 FEDERAL REGIS-
TER and making available to the public
status reports on EISs and other ele-
ments of the environmental review
process.
(3) Office of an Assistant 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 projects will have !>
or should have an EIS prepared on nd
them.
(v) Pursuant to |6.l02(b) of this I
subpart. preparing legislative EISs as
appropriate on EPA legislative Initia-
tives.
(4) The Office of Policy. Planning.
and Evaluation duties Include: respon-
-------
tnvlrwMMntal PratocHon Agmicy
slbllltles for coordinating the prepara-
tion of EISs required on EPA legisla-
tive proposals In accordance with
I a.l02(t».
(b) Responsibilities for itibporf E
(1) Responsible official. The responsi-
ble official for EPA actions covered by
this subpart Is the Regional Adminis-
trator.
(2) Attittant Adminlttrator. The re-
sponsibilities of the Assistant Adminis-
trator, as described In |«.103(aX3>.
shall be assumed by the Assistant Ad-
ministrator tor Water for EPA actions
covered by this subpart.
(c) RespoiuiMliiie* for wbpart F
(1) Responsible official. The responsi-
ble official for activities covered by
this subpart Is the Regional Adminis-
trator.
(2) .Assistant Administrator. The re-
sponsibilities of the Assistant Adminis-
trator, as described In |«.!03(aMS).
shall be assumed by the Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Enforcement and Com-
pliance Monitoring for EPA actions
covered by this subpart.
Responsibilities for tubpart O.
The Assistant Administrator for Re-
search and Development will be the
responsible official for activities cov-
ered by this subpart.
(e) Responsibilities for (tibparf H.
The Assistant Administrator for Solid
Waste-and Emergency Response will
be the responsible official for activities
covered by this subpart.
(f) Responsibility* for tubpart I.
The responsible official for new con-
struction and modification of special
purpose facilities Is as follows:
(1) 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 (OARM) 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.
(3) The Regional Administrator
ill be the responsible official on all
Movement and modification
J.6.IOS
projects for which the regional office
has received the funding allowance.
144 PR B4177. Nov. 6. 1979. as amended at 47
FR M2B. Mar. 8. 1982: 60 PR 28315. June 26.
INS: 51 PR 326M. Sept. 12. IMS)
.194 Early Involvement of private par-
He*.
As required by 40 CFR 1501.2(d) and
|6.103 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:
(a) Prepare where practicable, gener-
ic guidelines deacrlblnc the scope and
level of environmental Information re-
quired from applicants as a basis for
evaluating their proposed actions, and
make these guidelines available upon
request.
Cb) Provide such guidance on a proj-
ect-by-project basis to any applicant
seeking assistance.
(c) Upon receipt of an application
for agency approval, or notification
that an application will be filed, con-
sult as required with other appropri-
ate parties to Initiate and coordinate
the necessary environmental analyses.
144 PR 84177. Nov. 6, 1979. u amended at 47
FR 9829. Mar. 8. 19821
J 1.195 Svnop«l« of environmental review
procedure*.
(a) Responsible official The respon-
sible official shall utilize a systematic.
Interdisciplinary approach to integrate
natural and social sciences as well as
environmental design arts In planning
programs and making decisions which
are subject to environmental review.
The respective staffs may be supple-
mented by professionals from other
agencies (see 40 CPR 1501.6) or con-
sultants whenever In-house capabili-
ties are Insufficiently Interdiscipli-
nary.
(b) Environmental Information doc-
ument* (E1D1. Environmental Infor-
mation documents (EIDs) must be pre-
pared by applicants, grantees, or per-
mittees and submitted to EPA u re-
quired In subparts E. F. a. H. and I.
§6.106
EIDs will be of sufficient scope to
enable the responsible official to pre-
pare an environmental assessment as
described under I S.lOS(d) of this part
and subparts E through I. EIDs will
not have to be prepared for actions
where a categorical exclusion has been
granted.
(c) Environmental review*. Environ-
mental reviews shall be conducted on
the EPA activities outlined In 16.102
of this part and set forth under sub-
parts E, F. O, H and I. This process
shall consist of a study of the action to
Identify and evaluate the related envi-
ronmental Impacts. The process shall
Include a review of any related envi-
ronmental Information document to
determine whether any significant Im-
pacts are anticipated and whether any
changes can be made In the proposed
action to eliminate significant adverse
Impacts: when an E1S is required. EPA
has overall responsibility for this
review, although grantees, applicants.
permittees or contractors will contrib-
ute to the review through submission
of environmental Information docu-
ments.
(d) Environmental aiiessmtnti. En-
vironmental assessments (I.e.. concise
public documents for which EPA Is re-
sponsible) are prepared to provide suf-
ficient data and analysis to determine
whether an E1S or finding of no signif-
icant Impact la required. Where EPA
determines that a categorical exclu-
sion Is appropriate or an EI8 will be
prepared, there Is no need to prepare a
formal environmental assessment.
(e) Notice of Intent and EtSi. When
the environmental review Indicates
that a significant environmental
Impact may occur and significant ad-
verse Impacts can not be eliminated by
making changes In the project, a
notice of Intent to prepare an EIS
shall be published In the FEDERAL Ren-
ISTEM. scoping shall be undertaken In
accordance with 40 CFR ISO 1.7, and a
draft EIS shall be prepared and dis-
tributed. After external coordination
and evaluation of the comments re-
ceived, a final EIS shall be prepared
and disseminated. The final EIS shall
list any mitigation measures necessary
to make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
40 CFR Ch. I (7.L91 Edition)
(f) Finding of no significant impact
(FNSI). When the environmental
review Indicates no significant Impacts
are anticipated or when the project Is
altered to eliminate any significant ad-
verse Impacts, a FNSI shall be Issued
and made available to the public. The
environmental assessment shall be In-
cluded as a part of the FNSI. The
FNSI shall list any mitigation meas-
ures necessary to make the recom-
mended alternative environmentally
acceptable.
(g) Record of decision. At the lime
of Its decision on any action for -which
a final EIS has been prepared, the re-
sponsible official shall prepare a con-
cise public record of the decision. The
record of decision shall describe those
mitigation measures to be undertaken
which will make the selected alterna-
tive environmentally, acceptable.
Where the final EIS recommends the
alternative which Is ultimately chosen
by the responsible official, the record
of decision may be extracted from the
executive summary to the final EIS..
(h> Monitoring. The responsible offi-
cial shall provide for monitoring to
assure that decisions on any action
where a final EIS has been prepared
are properly Implemented. Appropri-
ate mitigation measures shall be In-
cluded In actions undertaken by EPA.
144 PR 84177. Nov. 8. 1979. as amended at 50
PR 28315. June 25. 1985. 51 FR 31810. Sept.
12. 19881
««.IM Deviation*.
(a) General The Assistant Adminis-
trator. OEA. Is authorized to approve
deviations from these regulations. De-
viation approvals shall be made In
writing by the Assistant Administra-
tor. OEA.
(b) Requirements. (1) Where emer-
gency circumstances make It necessary
to take an action with significant envi-
ronmental Impact without observing
the substantive provisions of these
regulations or the CEQ Regulations.
the responsible official shall notify
the Assistant Administrator. OEA.
before taking such action. The respon-
sible official shall consider to the
extent possible alternative arrange-
ments; such arrangements will be lim-
ited to actions necessary to control the
-------
I/I
Environmental Protection Agmcy
immediate Impacts of the emergency;
other actions remain subject to the en-
vironmental review process. The As-
sistant Administrator. OEA. after con-
sulting CBQ, will Inform the responsi-
ble official, as expedltiously 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 In
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 te.MHMbXU or <2> of
this part with the Director, Grants
Administration Division, Office of
Planning and Management, for any re-
quired grant-related deviation under
40 CFR 30.1000. as well as the appro-
priate Assistant Administrator.
[«4 PR 64177. Nov. «. 1919. u amended at 41
FR 982*. liar. 8.198*1
81.107 Categorical exelualon*.
(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 16.505. 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.
(b) Determination. The responsible
official shall determine whether an
action Is eligible for a categorical ex-
clusion as established by general crite-
ria In 18.107 (d) and (e) 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 follow
}6.107
Ing review in accordance with
I6.400U). 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: (I) The
proposed action no longer meets the
requirements for a categorical exclu-
sion due to changes In the proposed
action; or (2) determines from new evi-
dence that serious local or environ-
mental Issues exist; or (3) that Feder-
al. State, local, or tribal law* are being
or may be violated.
(d) General categories of action* eli-
gible for exclusion. Actions consistent
with any of the following categories
are eligible for a categorical exclusion:
(1) Actions which are solely directed
toward minor rehabilitation of exist-
ing facilities, functional replacement
of equipment, or towards the construc-
tion of new ancillary facilities adja-
cent or appurtenant to existing facili-
ties;
(2) Other actions specifically allowed
In program specific subparts of this
regulation; or
(3) Other actions developed In ac-
cordance with paragraph (f> of this
section.
(e) General criteria /or not granting
a categorical exclusion. (1) The full
environmental review procedures of
this part must be followed If undertak-
ing an action consistent with allowable
categories In paragraph (d) of this sec-
tion may Involve serious local or envi-
ronmental Issues, or meets any of the
criteria listed below:
(I) The action Is known or expected
to have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment.
either Individually, cumulatively over
time, or In conjunction with other fed-
eral. State, local, tribal or private ac-
tions:
(II) The action Is known or expected
to directly or Indirectly affect:
§6.108
(A) Cultural resource ureas such as
Archaeological and historic sites In ac-
cordance with I 6.301.
(B) Endangered or threatened spe-
cies and their critical habitats In ac-
cordance with I 6.302 or State lists.
(C) Environmentally Important nat-
ural resource areas such as flood-
plains, wetlands. Important farmlands.
aquifer recharge zones In accordance
with 16.302. or
(D) Other resource areas Identified
In supplemental guidance Issued by
the OEA;
(III) The action Is known or expected
not to be cost-effective or to cause sig-
nificant public controversy; or
-------
(2) Alter the character of exlstlnt
residential areas;
<3) Adversely affect a floodplaln; or
(4) Adversely affect significant
amounts of Important farmlands as
defined In requirements In 16.302(0,
or agricultural operations on this land.
Table of contents;
(d) Purpose of and need for action;
(e) Alternatives Including proposed
action;
(f) Affected environment:
(g) Environmental consequences of
the alternatives:
(h> Coordination (Includes list of
agencies, organizations, and persons to
whom copies of the EI8 are sent):
(I) List of preparers;
(J) Index (commensurate with com-
lty of EI8):
96.203
I (.MI Executive luminary.
The executive summary shall de-
scribe In sufficient detail UO-1S pages)
the critical facets of the EIS so that
the reader can become familiar with
the proposed project or action and Its
net effects. The executive summary
hall focus on:
(a) The existing problem:
(b) A brief description of each alter-
native evaluated (Including the pre-
ferred and no action alternatives)
along with a listing of the environmen-
tal Impacts, possible mitigation meas-
ures relating to each alternative, and
any. areas of controversy (Including
Issues raised by governmental agencies
and the public): and
(c) Any major conclusions.
A comprehensive summary may be
prepared In Instances where the EIS Is
unusually long In nature. In accord-
ance with 40 CFR 1502.1ft. the compre-
hensive summary may be circulated In
lieu of the EIS; however, both docu-
ments shall be distributed to any Fed-
eral. State and local agencies who
have EIS review responsibilities and
also shall be made available to other
Interested parties upon request.
IS.XU Body of EIS*.
(a) Purpote and need. The EIS shall
clearly specify the underlying purpose
and need to which EPA la responding.
If the action Is a request for a permit
or a grant, the EIS shall clearly speci-
fy the goals and objectives of the ap-
plicant.
(b) Alternative* including the pro-
posed action. In addition to 40 CFR
1502.14, the EIS shall discuss:
(I) Alternatives considered by the ap-
plicant This section shall Include a
balanced description of each alterna-
tive considered by the applicant.
These discussions shall Include size
and location of facilities, land require-
ments, operation and maintenance re-
quirements, auxiliary structures such
as pipelines or transmission lines, and
construction schedules. The alterna-
tive of no action shall be discussed and
the applicant's preferred alternative^)
shall be Identified. For alternatives
which were eliminated from detailed
study, a brief discussion of the reasons
for their having been eliminated shall
be Included.
(2) Alternative* available to EPA.
EPA alternatives to be discussed shall
Include: (I) Taking an action; or (It)
taking an action on a modified or al-
ternative project. Including an action
not considered by the applicant; and
(III) denying the action.
(3) Alternative* available to other
permitting apenciet. When preparing
a Joint EIS. and If applicable, the al-
ternatives available to other Federal
and/or State agencies shall be dis-
cussed.
(4) Identifying preferred alternative.
In the final EIS. the responsible offi-
cial shall signify the preferred alterna-
tive.
(c) Affected environment and envi-
ronmental consequences of the alterna-
tive*. The affected environment on
which the evaluation of each alterna-
tive shall be based Includes, for exam-
ple, hydrology, geology, air quality,
noise, biology, socloeconomlcs, energy,
land use. and archeology and historic
subjects. The discussion shall be struc-
tured so as to present the total Im-
pacts of each alternative for easy com-
parison among all alternatives by the
reader. The effects of a "no action" al-
ternative should be included to facili-
tate reader comparison of the benefi-
cial and adverse Impacts of other al-
ternatives to the applicant doing noth-
ing. A description of the environmen-
tal setting shall be Included In the "no
action" alternative for the purpose of
providing needed background Informa-
tion. The amount of detail In describ-
ing the affected environment shall be
commensurate with the complexity of
the situation and the Importance of
the anticipated Impacts.
(d) Coordination. The EIS shall In-
clude: (1) The objections and sugges-
tions made by local. Stale, and Federal
agencies before and during the EIS
review process must be given full con-
sideration, along with the Issues of
public concern expressed by Individual
citizens and Interested environmental
groups. The EIS must Include discus-
sions of any such comments concern-
Ing our actions, and the author of
each comment should be Identified. If
has resulted In a change In
40 » Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
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 84177. Nov. 6. 1979. u amended »t SO
PR 28318. June 25. 198S1
0 t.204 Incorporation by reference.
In addition to 40 CFR 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 avall&ble for In-
spection by potentially Interested per-
sons within the period allowed for
comment.
8 (.205 l.l*t of prepare!*.
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.
Subpart CCoordination With Otfwr
Environmental Rovlow and Con-
tuHatlon Roqulromontt
M.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 undrr Subparts E IhrouKh I. This
-------
fnvbMMMntal Protection Agoncy
SOW
J o.3«
40 Cm Ch. I (7.1-91 Edlrlan)
subpart presents the central require-
ments 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.
144 PR 64177. Nov. 6. IB79. at amended at SO
PR 16316. June IB. 1985]
ICMI Landmark*, historical, and archeo-
logleal sites.
EPA Is subject to the requirements
of the Historic Sites Act of 1935. 16
D.8.C. 461 et teg., the National Histor-
ic Preservation Act of 1B66. as amend-
ed. 16 UJ3.C. 470 et teg., the Archae-
ological and Historic Preservation Act
of 1074.16 O.S.C. 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 CFR 62.6Xd) to avoid undesirable
Impacts upon such landmarks.
(b) Historic, architectural, archeo-
loaical. and cultural titet. Under sec-
tion 106 of the National Historic Pres-
ervation Act and Executive Order
11603. 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 CFR part 800. The
responsible official must Identify prop-
erties 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 36 CFR part
63.
(c) Hittoric. prehistoric and archeo-
logical 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-
thorized 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 46 FR 44716
(September 20. 1983).
144 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979. 1* amended at SO
FR 16316. June 36. 1985)
M.302 Wetland*, floodplain*. Important
farmland!, coaital sonei, *IM and
tcenlc riven, flih and wildlife, and en-
dangered pecle*.
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 11000. 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 Floodplain
Management and Wetlands Protection
(dated January S. 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, Floodplain Manage-
ment, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate the potential effects of ac-
tions they may take In a floodplain to
avoid, to the extent possible, adverse
effects associated with direct and Indi-
rect development of a floodplain.
EPA's Statement of Procedures on
Floodplain 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 floodplain. 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.
(c) Important farmlands. 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.
(PPPA) 7 U.S.C. 4201 et teg., requires
federal agfncles to use criteria devel-
oped by the Soil Conservation Service.
VS. Department of Agriculture, to:
(1) 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 adverse 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 prime.
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 U.S. Department of Agri-
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.
(d) Coastal zone management. The
Coastal Zone Management Act, 16
U.S.C. 1451 et seg.. requires that all
Federal activities In coastal areas be
consistent with approved Slate Coast-
al Zone Management Programs, to the
maximum extent possible. If an EPA
action may affect a coastal zone 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 State
has an approved coastal zone manage-
ment program, a consistency determi-
nation shall be sought In accordance
with procedures promulgated by the.
Office of Coastal Zone Management In
IS CFR part 930.
(e) Wild and scenic riven. (I) The
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 16 U.S.C.
1274 et seg.. establishes requirements
applicable to water resource projects
affecting wild, scenic or recreational
rivers within the National Wild and
Scenic Rivers system as well as rivers
designated on the National Rivers 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
adverse effect on the values for which
a river In the National System or
study river on the National Rivers In-
ventory was established, as determined
by the Secretary of the Interior for
rivers under the Jurisdiction of the De-
partment of the Interior and by the
Secretary of Agriculture for rivers
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
00
"
-------
bivfc
oo
which win not Invade the area or un-
reasonably diminish the scenic, recre-
ational, and fish 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 fish 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 Rivers 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 in writ-
Ing at the time the recommendation or
request is 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
207. 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 island* The Coastal Bar-
rier Resources Act. 16 O.S.C. 3501 et
sea., generally prohibits new federal
expenditures or financial assistance
for any purpose within the Coastal
Barrier Resources System on or after
October 18. 1982. Specified exceptions
to this prohibition are allowed only
after consultation with the Secretary
of J^ajnterior. The responsible offl-
ensure that consultation is
§6.302
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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service published guidelines defining
new expenditures and financial assist-
ance, and describing procedures for
consultation at 48 PR 45864 (October
6. 1983).
(g) Fiih and wildlife protection. The
Pish and Wildlife Coordination Act. 16
U.8.C. 661 et ten., 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 envi-
ronmental assessment or environmen-
tal Impact statement. Consultation
procedures are detailed In 16 VS.C.
662.
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;
(2) 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 Is 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 SIP'S provisions for demonstrating
reasonable further progress toward at-
tainment of the national ambient air
quality standards by the required
date:
(4) The proposed action complies
all other provisions' and require-
tsof the SIP.
40 Cfl Ct». I (7.1-91 Edition)
(e) During the 30-day FNSI and 45-
day draft EIS 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 Is received by EPA during
the review time period.
(f) The responsible official shall pro-
vide In the FNSI or the final EIS a re
sponse to a notification of state non-
concurrence with the EPA conformity
determination. This response shall In-
clude the basis 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 Is 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 requirements specified In sec-
tion 318(b) of the Clean Air Act. 42
U.8.C. 7616. and Agency Implementing
procedures.
(44 PR 64177. Nov. 6. l»7». a* amended at 80
FR 26317. June 25.1885)
Subpart DPublic and Otn*r P»d»rol
Agency Invelvaniant
18.408 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
responsible official shall ensure that
public notice is provided for In accord-
ance with 40 CFR 1506.6 and shall
ensure that public Involvement Is car-
ried out In accordance with EPA
Public Participation Regulations. 40
CFR part 25, and other applicable
EPA public participation procedures.
(b) Publication of notice* of Intent
As soon as practicable after his decl-
-------
f nvlrwmwntoj Protection Agency
alon 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 OBA
to publish the notice of Intent In the
FEDERAL Rtatsra. The responsible of-
ficial shall send to OEA the signed
original notice of Intent for FEDERAL
REGISTER publication purposes. The
scoping process should be Initiated as
soon as practicable In accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 1601.7.
Participants In the scoping process
shall be kept Informed of substantial
changes which evolve during the E1S
drafting process.
Public meeting* or hearing*.
Public meetings or hearings shall be
conducted consistent with Agency pro-
gram requirements. 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 a draft EIS. The re-
sponsible official shall ensure that the
draft EIS Is made available to the
M public at least 30 days In advance of
i the hearing.
*° (d) Finding* of no ligniflcant
impact tFNStt. The responsible offi-
cial shall allow for sufficient public
review of a FN8I before It becomes ef-
fective. The FN8I and attendant pub-
lication must state that Interested per-
sons disagreeing with the decision may
submit comments 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 FNSI before taking ad-
ministrative action. The FNSI shall be
made available to the public In accord-
ance with the requirements and all ap-
propriate recommendations contained
In 11608.0 of this title:
(e) Record of Decision (ROD). The
responsible official shall disseminate
the ROD to those parties which com-
mented on the draft or final EIS.
(f) Categorical exclusions. (1) For
categorical exclusion determinations
under subpart E (Wastewater Treat-
ment Construction Grants Program).
an applicant who files for and receives
§6.401
a determination of categorical exclu-
sion under |6.107(a). or has one re-
scinded under |«.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 |8.107(b) avail-
able to the public and distribute the
notice of the determination to all
known Interested parties.
(2) For categorical exclusion deter-
minations under other subparts of this
regulation, no public notice need be
Issued; however, information regard-
Ing these determinations may be ob-
tained by contacting the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency's Office of
Research Program Management for
ORD actions, or the Office of Federal
Activities for other program actions.
144 PR 64177. Nov. 6.1»1». u amended at SI
PR 32811. Sept. 12. 1»S8; 56 PR 20S43. May
». 1M11
11.401 Official mini 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 EIS 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 REGISTER listing all
EISs received during a given week.
The 46-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 CFR 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 ihall be made
until the later of the following dates:
(1) Ninety (90) days af*s>r the date es
tabllshed In |6.401(a) of this part
from which the draft EIS review time
period Is computed.
56.4W
(2) Thirty (30) days after the date
established In I 6.401(a) of this part
from which the final EIS review time
period Is computed.
(c) Filing of ElSi. 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-I04).
OEA will provide CEQ with one copy
of each EIS filed. 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 filing.
(d) Extensions or waivers. The re-
sponsible official may Independently
extend review periods. In such cases.
the responsible official shall notify
OEA as soon as possible so that ade-
quate notice may be published In the
weekly FEDERAL REGISTER report. OEA
upon a showing of compelling reasons
of national policy may reduce the pre-
scribed review periods. Also, OEA
upon a showing by any other Federal
agency of compelling reasons of na-
tional policy may extend prescribed
review periods, but only after consul-
tation with the responsible official. If
the responsible official does not
concur with the extension of time.
OEA may not extend a prescribed
review period more than 30 days
beyond the minimum prescribed
review period.
(e) Rescission of filed EISs. The re-
sponsible official shall file EISs with
OEA at the same time they are trans-
mitted to commenting agencies and
made available to the public. The re-
sponsible official Is required to repro-
duce an adequate supply of EISs to
satisfy these distribution requirements
prior to filing an EIS. If the EIS Is not
made available, OEA will consider re-
traction of the EIS or revision of the
prescribed review periods based on the
circumstances.
(44 FR (4177. Nov. 6. 1979. as amended *t 47
FR 9829. Mar. 8.19821
A 8.402 Availability of document.
(a) General The responsible official
will ensure sufficient copies of the EIS
are distributed to Interested and af-
fected members of the public and are
made available for further public dls-
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
trlbutlon. EISs. comments received,
and any underlying documents should
be available to the public pursuant to
the provisions of the Freedom of In-
formation Act (5 U.S.C. 552
-------
tnvfawMMfiM Protection Agency
In the same fashion (exclusive of scop-
Ing) as draft and final EISs.
(b) Alternative procedure*. In the
cue. 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.
[44 PR Mm. Nov. 8. int. at amended at 47
PR MM. Mar. S. 19821
.JLfMM* B
Mfwfvwr *"
lot Review
Wastewater
part. The responsible federal official Is
the EPA Regional Administrator and
the responsible State official Is as de-
fined In a delegation agreement under
205(g) of the Clean Water Act. The re-
sponsibilities of the State official are
subject to the limitations In 16.814 of
this subpart.
(h) Approval of the facilitiet plan
means approval of the facilities plan
for a proposed wastewater treatment
works pursuant to 40 CFR part 36.
subpart E or I.
for
Construction Grants I «.S6S Applicability and limitation*.
Souacc M FR M317. June IS. IMS. unlen
olhenriac noted.
K.6M Purpose,
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
11 of the Clean Water Act.
O I«.S01 Definition*.
(a) Step 1 facilitiet planning means
O preparation of a plan for facilities as
described In 40 CFR part 35. subpart E
or I.
(b) Step 2 means a project to prepare
design drawings and specifications as
described In 40 CFR part 35. subpart E
or I.
(c) Step 3 means a project to build a
publicly owned treatment works as de-
scribed In 40 CFR part 35. subpart E
or I.
Cd) Step 2+J means a project which
combines preparation of design draw-
ings and specifications as described In
16.601(b) and building as described In
16.50KO.
Applicant means any Individual.
agency, or entity which has filed an
application for grant assistance under
40 CFR part 35. subpart E or I.
Cf) Grantee means any Individual.
agency, or entity which has been
awarded wastewater treatment con-
struction grant assistance under 40
CFR part 35. subpart E or I.
(g) Responsible Official means a
W State official authorized to
requirements of this aub-
(a) Applicability. This subpart ap-
plies to the following actions:
(1) Approval of a facilities plan or an
amendment to the plan;
(2) Award of grant assistance for a
project where slgnflcant change has
occurred In the project or Its Impact
since prior compliance with this part:
and
(3) Approval of preliminary Step 3
work prior to the award of grant as-
sistance pursuant to 40 CFR part 35.
subpart E or I.
(b) Limitations. (1) Except as pro-
vided In |8.504(c). all recipients of
Step 1 grant assistance must comply
with the requirements, steps, and pro-
cedures described In this subpart.
(2) As specified In 40 CFR 35.2113.
projects that have not received Step 1
grant assistance must comply with the
requirements of this subpart prior to
submission of an application for Step 3
or Step 2 + 3 grant assistance.
(3) Except as otherwise provided In
I 6.507. no step 3 or 2-f 3 grant assist-
ance may be awarded for the construc-
tion of any component/portion of a
proposed wastewater treatment
system(s) until the responsible official
has:
(I) Completed the environmental
review for all complete wastewater
treatment system alternatives under
consideration for the facilities plan-
ning area, or any larger study area
Identified for the purposes of conduct-
Ing an adequate environmental review
as required under this subpart; and
(II) Recorded the selection of the
preferred alternative^) In the appro-
priate decision document (ROD for
EISs. FNSI for environmental assess-
86.503
merits, or written determination for
categorical exclusions).
(4) In accord with |6.302(f). on or
after October 18.1082, no new expend-
itures or financial assistance Involving
the construction grants program can
be made within the Coastal Barrier
Resource System, or for projects out-
side the system which would have the
effect of encouraging development In
the system, other than specified ex-
ceptions made by the EPA after con-
sultation with the Secretary of the In-
terior.
ISO PR 26317. June 28. 1988. a* amended at
SI FR 32611. Sept. 12.1986}
M.M3 Overflew of the environmental
mlew pYoeeii.
The process for conducting an envi-
ronmental review of wastewater treat-
ment construction grant projects In-
cludes the following steps:
(a) Consultation. The Step I grantee
or the potential Step 3 or Step 2 + 3 ap-
plicant Is encouraged to consult with
the State and EPA early in project
formulation or the facilities planning
stage to determine whether a project
Is eligible for a categorical exclusion
from the remaining substantive envi-
ronmental review requirements of this
part (|8.605), to determine alterna-
tives to the proposed project for eval-
uation, to Identify potential environ-
mental Issues and opportunities for
public recreation and open space, and
to determine the potential need for
partitioning the environmental review
process and/or the need for an Envi-
ronmental Impact Statement (EI8).
(b) Determining categorical exclu-
sion eligibility. At the request of a po-
tential Step 3 or Step 2 f 3 grant appli-
cant, or a Step I facilities planning
grantee, the responsible official will
determine If a project Is eligible for a
categorical exclusion In accordance
with I 8.505. A Step 1 facilities plan-
ning grantee awarded a Step 1 grant
on or before December 29. 1981 may
request a categorical exclusion at any
time during Step 1 facilities planning.
A potential Step 3 or Step 2+3 grant
applicant may request a categorical
exclusion at any time before the sub-
sion of a Step 3 or Step 2 f 3 grant
40 CFI Ch. I (7-1-91 Idlllon)
(C) Documenting environmental in-
formation. If the project Is determined
to be Ineligible for a categorical exclu-
sion. or If no request for a categorical
exclusion Is made, the potential Step 3
or Step 2-1-3 applicant or the Step I
grantee subsequently prepares an En-
vironmental Information Document
(EID) (1 8.508) for the project.
(d> Preparing environmental attest-
menu. Except as provided In
|8.S08(cM4) and following a review of
the EID by EPA or by a State with
delegated authority. EPA prepares an
environmental assessment (18.506). or
a State with delegated authority
(18.514) prepares a preliminary envi-
ronmental assessment. EPA reviews
and finalizes any preliminary assess-
ments. EPA subsequently:
( 1 ) Prepares and Issues a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FNSI)
(1 8.508); or
(2) Prepares and issues a Notice of
Intent to prepare an original or sup-
plemental EIS (|8.S10) and Record of
Decision (ROD) (| 8.51 1 ).
(e) Monitoring. The construction
and post-construction operation and
maintenance of the facilities are moni-
tored (18.512) to ensure Implementa-
tion of mitigation measures (18.511)
Identified In the FNSI or ROD.
(SO PR 26317, June 25. 1885. as amended al
SI PR 32611. Sept. 13. 19861
14.504 ConuilUtlon during the
(a) General Consistent with 40 CFR
1501.2 and 35.2030, the responsible
official shall Initiate the environmen-
tal review process early to Identify en-
vironmental effects, avoid delays, and
resolve conflicts. The environmental
review process should be Integrated
throughout the facilities planning
process. Two processes for consulta-
tion are described In this section to
meet this objective. The first address-
es projects awarded Step 1 grant as-
sistance on or before December 29,
1981. The second applies to projects
not receiving grant assistance for fa-
cilities planning on or before Decem-
ber 29, 1981 and. therefore, subject to
the regulations Implementing the Mu-
nicipal Wastewater Treatment Con-
-------
Af*ncy
traction Ormnt Amendment* of 1981
(40 CFR part SS. subpart I).
. 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 EIS.
The consultation would be most useful
during the evaluation of project alter-
natives prior to the selection of a pre-
ferred alternative to assist In resolving
any Identified environmental prob-
lems.
I IMS Categorical eichulom.
. (a) General At the request of an ex-
isting Step 1 facilities planning grant-
ee or of a potential Step 3 or Step 2+3
grant applicant, the responsible offi-
cial, as provided for In ||6.107(b).
S.400U) and 6.504, 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
16.107(d) or | «.60S(b> and not Incon-
sistent with the criteria In 18.107(e> or
I e.60S(c).
(b) Specialised categories of action*
eligible for exclusion. For this subpart,
eligible actions consist of any of the
categories In I e.tOKd), or
(1) Actions for which the facilities
planning Is consistent with the catego-
ry listed In | 6.107(dMl) which do not
affect the degree of treatment or ca-
pacity of the existing facility Includ-
ing, but not limited to. Infiltration and
56.506
Inflow corrections, grant-eligible re-
placement of existing mechanical
equipment or structures, and the con-
struction of small structures on exist-
ing sites;
(2) 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 ol 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 with | «.107(f>.
(c) Specialized 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 I «.107(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 grant awards.
(1) After a categorical exclusion on a
proposed treatment works has been
granted, and notices published In ac-
cordance with 16.400(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 2+3 or Step 3
Brant 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.l07(f); or
(C) Readiestrevoke the categorical
exclusion In accordance with f 6.10T(c)
and require a complete environmental
review to determine the need for an
EIS In accordance with 18.508. fol-
lowed by preparation. Issuance and
distribution of an EA/PNSI or EIS/
ROD.
(II) That are made on projects that
have been awarded a Step 2+3 grant,
the responsible official shall, at the
time of plans and specifications review
under I 35.2202
-------
Agwtcy
environment^ assessment on which to
base a recommendation to finalize and
Issue the environmental assessment/
FNSI. For those States delegated envi-
ronmental review responsibilities
under 1 6.614. 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 finalize and Issue an envi-
ronmental auessment/FNSI or to pre-
pare and Issue a notice of Intent for an
EIS/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, Including 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:
( 1 ) Description of the existing 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-
potted action, shall be considered.
(2) Description of the future environ-
ment without the project. The relevant
future environmental conditions shall
be described. The no action alternative
should be discussed.
(3) Purpose and need. This should
Include a summary discussion and
demonstration of the need, or absence
of need, for wastewater treatment In
the facilities planning area, with par-
ticular emphasis on existing public
health or water quality problems and
their severity and extent
(4) Documentation. Citations to In-
formation used to describe the exist-
ing environment and to assess future
*nmental Impacts should be
i referenced and documented.
sources should Include, as ap-
§6406
propriate but not limited to, local.
tribal, regional. State, and federal
agencies as well as public and private
organisations and Institutions with re-
sponsibility or Interest In the types of
conditions listed In f 8.609 and In sub-
part C of this part.
(5) Analviit 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
30, 1978. 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:
(II) Appropriate water conservation
measures;
(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 utilization 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
} «.507
(vllh Multiple use Including recrea-
tion, other open space, and environ-
mental education.
(8) Evaluating environmental come-
quencet 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 2 + 3 applicants.
(7) Minimizing advene effects 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 provision*
Include changes In facility design, size.
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 EIS. The EPA shall
condition a grant, or seek other ways,
to ensure that the grantee will comply
jutlh such environmental review deter-
^nations.
40 Cm Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
(c) FNSI/EIS determination. The re-
sponsible official shall apply the crite-
ria under I 8.500 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 BIS 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
EID, 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.
150 PR 20317. June 2ft. 1985. «s amended at
SI FR 32812. Sept. 12. 1986]
A6.S07 Partitioning Ihe environmental
review proceu.
(a) Purpote. 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 system(s). When
there are overriding considerations of
cost or Impaired program effective-
ness, 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 system(s^
-------
Environmental Prolsctton Af ency
In the planning tret In accordance
with 1«.S02(bM3> shall comply with all
requirements under 16.609.
(b) Criteria for partitioning. (1)
Projects may be partitioned under the
followlni circumstances:
(1) To overcome Impaired program
effectiveness, the project component.
In addition to meeting the criteria
listed In paragraph (bX2> 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 (bH2) of
this section, must achieve a cost sav-
ings to the federal government and/or
to the grantee's or potential grantee's
overall coats Incurred In procuring the
wastewater treatment components)
and/or the Installation of other relat-
ed public works projects funded In co-
ordination with other federal. State.
tribal or local agencies.
(2) The project component also
must:
(I) Not foreclose any reasonable al-
ternatives Identified for the overall
wastewater treatment works system(8);
(II) Not cause significant advene
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
(111) Not be highly controversial.
(c) fteouest* for partitioning. The
applicant's or State's request for parti-
tioning must contain the following:
(DA description of the discrete com-
ponent proposed for construction
before completing the environmental
review of the entire facilities plan;
(2) How the component meets the
above criteria;
(3) The environmental Information
required by 16.509 of this subpart for
the component: and
(4) Any preliminary Information
that may be Important to EPA In an
EIS determination for the entire fa-
cilities plan (10.509).
(d) Approval of requettt for parti-
tioning. The responsible official shall:
(1) Review the request for partition-
ing against all requirements of this
subpart;
(2) It approvable, prepare and Issue
a FN8I in accordance with I fl.508;
(3) Include a grant condition prohib-
iting the building of additional or dif-
ferent components of the entire facili-
ties system(s) in the planning area as
described In f «.602(bM3KI).
ISO PR 18317. June 35. 1BB6. u amended »t
tl PR 33611. Sept. U. IMS)
IMS rinding of No Significant Impact
(PNSI) determination.
(a) Criteria for producing and All-
trtbuting FtfSI*. If, after completion
of the environmental review, EPA de-
termines that an EIS will not be re-
quired, the responsible official shall
Issue a PNSI In accordance with
II 6.105U) and 6.4. The PNSI 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 |8.606(c). Following
the Agency's Independent review, the
environmental assessment will be fi-
nalized and either be Incorporated
Into, or attached to, the FN8I. The
FN8I 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 grnnt award*.
(1) Once an environmental assessment
has been prepared and the Issued
FN8I becomes effective for the treat-
ment works within the study area.
grant awards may proceed without
preparation of additional PNSIs,
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:
U) That are five or more years old on
projects awaiting Step 2+3 or Step 3
grant funding, the responsible official
shall re-evaluate the project, environ-
56.509
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 revising the
environmental assessment;
(B) Supplementupdate Information
and prepare. Issue and distribute a re-
vised &A/PNSI In accordance with
||6.105(f)and6.400(d>;or
(C) Reauatwithdraw the PNSI
and publish a notice of Intent to
produce an EIS followed by the prepa-
ration, Issuance and distribution of the
EIS/ROO.
(II) That are made on projects that
have been awarded a Step 2-1-3 grant,
the responsible official shall, at the
tune of plans and specifications review
under 13B.2202 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.
(II PR JM13. Sept 12. !«M)
I MM Criteria for Initiating Environmen-
tal Impact Statement* (EIS).
(a) Condition* requiring KISt. (1)
The responsible official shall assure
that an EIS 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
(2) The treated effluent Is being dis-
charged Into a body of water where
the present classification 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.
40 OK Ch. I (7-1-91 lafflon)
I6.SU Environmental Impact BuUmtnt
(EIS) preparation.
(a) Slept in preparing SIS*. 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 I fl.lOS(e) of this
part.
(2) 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 EIS. A notice of this scop-
ing meeting must be-made In accord-
ance with |6.400(a) and 40 CPR
1606.6(b). As part of the scoping meet-
Ing 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 analyzed 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 preparera 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.
-------
iitvfr+natantsd Pr+HctUn Agency
during this process and the reasons
documented as part of the EIS.
MeOtodt for preparing JUS*.
After EPA determines the need for an
EIS, It shall select one of the following
methods for Its preparation:
(1) Directly by EPA's own staff;
(3) By EPA contracting directly with
a qualified consulting firm:
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.
[BO PR 2SJ17. June IS. 1986. u amended «t
51 PR 3M1S. Sept. 12. IBM)
I I.S11 Monitoring for compliance.
(a) General The responsible official
shall ensure adequate monitoring of
mitigation measures and other grant
conditions Identified In the FN8I, or
ROD.
(b) Enforcement. If the grantee falls
to comply with grant conditions, the
responsible official may consider ap-
plying any of the sanctions specified
In 40 CFR 30.900.
M.5IJ Public participation.
(a) General Consistent with public
participation regulations In part 25 of
this title, and subpart D of this part. It
is EPA policy that certain public par-
ticipation steps be achieved before the
State and EPA complete the environ-
mental review process. As a 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 2B of this title:
(1) One public meeting when alter-
natives have been developed,' but
before an alternative has been select-
ed, to discuss all alternatives under
consideration and the reasons for re-
jection of others: and
(2) One public hearing prior to
formal adoption of a facilities plan to
discuss the proposed facilities plsn
and any needed mitigation measures.
(b) Coordination. Public participa-
tion activities undertaken In connec-
tion with the environmental review
40 » Ch. I (7.1-91 edition)
process should be coordinated with
any other applicable public participa-
tion program wherever possible.
(c) Scope. The requirements of 40
CFR 6.400 shall be fulfilled, and con-
sistent with 40 CPR 1804.0. the re-
sponsible official may Institute such
additional NEPA related public par-
ticipation procedures as are deemed
necessary during the environmental
review process.
ISO PR 1S3I7. June 25. IBM. ai amended it
SI PR SMI3. Sept. 12. 1BSS1
11814 Delegation to State*.
(a) General Authority delegated to
the State under section 208(g) of the
Clean Water Act to review a facilities
plan may Include all EPA activities
under this part except for the follow-
ing:
(1) Determinations of whether or
not a project qualifies for a categorical
exclusion;
(2) Determinations to partition the
environmental review process;
(3) Finalizing the scope of an EID
when required to adequately conclude
an Independent review of a prelimi-
nary environmental assessment:
(4) Finalizing the scope of an envi-
ronmental assessement. and flnallza-
tlon, approval and Issuance of a final
environmental assessment;
(8) Determination to Issue, and issu-
ance of. a FNSI based on a completed
(16.808) or partitioned <| 6.607(dX2»
environmental review;
(6) Determination to Issue, and Issu-
ance of. a notice of intent for prepar-
ing an EIS;
(7) Preparation of EISs under
|8.610(b) (1) and (3). final decisions
required for preparing an EIS under
I 6.81(KbH3). finalizing the agreement
to prepare an EIS under 16.810(b)(4>,
finalizing the scope of an EIS. and Is-
suance of draft, final and supplemen-
tal EISs:
(B) Preparation and Issuance of the
ROD bssed on an EIS:
(9) 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-
-------
Envlromwontat Protection Agency
clslon document* are five or more
years old. or determination* following
re-evaluations on projects submitted
for plans and specifications review and
approval In the case of awarded Step
a+3 projects where the EPA Regional
Administrator hat been advised that
additional environmental review l>
necessary. In accordance with
18.505 or
I 6.611(cM2>: and
(11) Maintenance of official EPA
monthly status reports aa required
under I 6.402 Elimination of 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 requirements
under this subpart, maximum consid-
eration shall be given to eliminating
duplication In accordance with 11509.2
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.
150 FR 28JI7, June 25. IMS. at amended at
Bl FR 32011. Sept. 12. IMS]
Subpart fEnvironmental Review
Procedure* for MM Now Sourco
NPDCS Program
||.«M 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
(NPDE8) discharge permits author-
ized under section 306. section 402. and
section 6U(cMl) of the Clean Water
Act
(b) Permit regulation*. All refer-
ences In this subpart to the permit reg-
ulation* shall mean parts 122 and 124
of title 40 of the CFR relating to the
NPDES program.
144 PR 64177. Nov. 6.1*79. ** amended at 47
PR 9SJI. Mar. i. 10*2]
S 4.604
.Ml Definitions.
(a) The terra odrolntifrotitx octton
for the sake of this subpart means the
issuance by EPA of an NPDES permit
to discharge as a new source, pursuant
to 40 CFR 124.18.
The terra 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
source.
(44 Fit 84177. Nov. 8.ItTt. aa amended at 47
PR IMI. liar.8. 1M21
18.88* Applicability.
(a) General The procedure! 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 402(b)
of the Clean Water Act.
(b) New Source Determination. An
NPDES permittee must be determined
a new source before these procedures
apply. New source determinations will
be undertaken pursuant to the provi-
sions of the permit regulations under
1122.20U) and (b) of this chapter and
1122.63(h>.
144 FR 84177. Nov. 8.1*». as amended at 47
FR MSI. Mar. 8. 1M2: 51 FR 32813. Sept. 12.
1M81
18.883 Umltallona on attloni daring en-
vironmental review proeeM.
The processing and review of an ap-
plicant's NPDES permit application
shall proceed concurrently with the
procedures within this subpart. Ac-
tions undertaken by the applicant or
EPA shall be performed consistent
with the requirements of 1122.2fcc> of
this chapter.
{47 PR M31. liar. 8. 1M2. at amended at 51
PR 32813. Sept 12.1M81
18.804 Environmental review proem.
(a) New tource. If EPA'a Initial de-
termination under 16.602(b) Is that
the facility is a new source, the re-
sponsible official shall evaluate any
environmental Information to deter-
mine If any significant Impacts are an-
ticipated and an EIS Is necessary. If
56.604
the permit applicant requests, the re-
sponsible official shall establish time
limits for the completion of the envi-
ronmental review process consistent
with 40 CFR 1501.8.
(b) Information need*. Information
necessary for a proper environmental
review shall be provided by the permit
applicant In an environmental Infor-
mation document. The responsible of-
ficial shall consult with the applicant
to determine the scope of an environ-
mental Information document. In
doing this the responsible official shall
consider the sice of the new source
and the extent to which the applicant
Is capable of providing the required in-
formation. The responsible official
shall not require the applicant to
gather data or perform analyses which
unnecessarily duplicate either existing
data or the results of existing analyses
available to EPA. The responsible offi-
cial shall keep requests for data to the
minimum consistent with his responsi-
bilities under NEPA.
(c) Environmental lusestmenC. The
responsible official shall prepare a
written environmental assessment
based on an environmental review of
either the environmental Information
document and/or any other available
environmental Information.
(di BIS determination. (1) When the
environmental review Indicates that a
significant environmental Impact may
occur and that the significant adverse
Impacts cannot be eliminated by
making changes In the proposed new
source project, a notice of Intent shall
be Issued, and a draft EIS prepared
and distributed. When the environ-
mental review Indicates no significant
Impacts are anticipated or when the
proposed project Is changed to elimi-
nate the significant adverse Impacts, a
FNSI shall be Issued which lists any
mitigation measures necessary to
make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
(2) The FNSI together with the envi-
ronmental assessment that supports
the finding shall be distributed In ac-
cordance with I 8.4 of this regula-
tion.
(et Lead agency. (1) If the environ-
mental review reveals that the prepa-
ration of an EIS Is required, the re-
sponsible official shall determine If
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
other Federal agencies are Involved
with the project. The responsible offi-
cial shall contact all other Involved
agencies and together the agencies
shall decide the lead agency based on
the criteria set forth In 40 CFR 1501.6.
(2) If. after the meeting of Involved
agencies. EPA has been determined to
be the lead agency, the responsible of-
ficial may request that other Involved
agencies be cooperating agencies. Co-
operating agencies shall be chosen and
shall be Involved In the EIS prepara-
tion process In the manner prescribed
In the 40 CFR 1501.6(a). If EPA has
been determined to be a cooperating
agency, the responsible official shall
be Involved In assisting In the prepara-
tion of the EIS In the manner pre-
scribed in 40 CFR lM>l.«(b).
(f) Notice of intent' CD If EPA Is the
lead agency for the preparation of an
EIS. the responsible official shall ar-
range through OER for the publica-
tion of the notice of Intent In the Fo>-
«HAL RMISTCB. distribute the notice of
Intent and arrange and conduct a scop-
Ing meeting as outlined In 40 CFR
1501.7.
<2> If the responsible official and the
permit applicant agree to a third party
method of EIS preparation, pursuant
to |fl.804(g)(3) of this part, the re-
sponsible official shall Insure that a
notice ot Intent Is published and that
a scoping meeting Is held before the
third party contractor begins work
which may Influence the scope of the
EIS.
(g) EIS method. EPA shall prepare
EISs by one of the following means:
(I) Directly by Its own staff;
(2) By contracting directly with a
qualified consulting firm; or
(3) By utilizing a third party
method, whereby the responsible offi-
cial enters Into a third party agree-
ment tor 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
-------
Envfe
ntal Fratectten
Mreement, 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
CHI) Specify the Information to be
developed and supervise the gathering.
analysis and presentation of the Infor-
mation. The responsible official shall
have sole authority for approval and
modification of the statements, analy-
ses, and conclusions Included In the
third party EIS.
(h) Document* for the adminittra-
tlve record. Pursuant to 40 CFR
124.e any envi-
ronmental assessment, FN81 EIS, or
supplement to an EIS shall be made a
part of the administrative record relat-
Q ed to permit Issuance.
J- 144 PR Mm. Nov. 6, int. M intended at 47
O\ FR 9831. Mar. 8.1982)
I IMS 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 CFR
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 an
5E8 permit shall then be baaed on
formation In this areawlde EIS.
EISs may be required In
S 6.606
certain circumstances In addition to
the areawlde 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.
(3) 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 adverse 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
advene 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.
MM Reeonl of decision.
(a) General At the time of permit
award, the responsible official shall
prepare a record of decision in those
eases where a final EIS was Issued In
accordance with 40 CFR 1505.2 and
§6.607
pursuant to the provisions of the
permit regulations under 40 CFR
124.10 and 124.18
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
(2) For extramural research
project*, the environmental review
hall be conducted before an Initial or
continuing award Is made. The appro-
priate program official will perform
the environmental review In accord-
ance with the process set forth In this
subpart and depicted In figure t. EPA
form 5300-33 will be used to document
categorical exclusion determinations
or, with appropriate supporting analy-
sis, as the environmental assessment
(EM). The completed form 5300-33 and
any finding of no significant Impact
(PNSI) or environmental Impact state-
ment (EIS) will be submitted with the
proposal package to the appropriate
EPA assistance or contract office.
(c) Aoencv 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-
grains may be adopted for use In
ORD's environmental reviews and sup-
plemented. as appropriate.
I I.TM Categoric*! eieliuloiu.
(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 MEPA
review. This determination shall be
based on general criteria In | «.107(d)
and specialized 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 16.107(e) 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 I a.!07(c). Projects that fall
to qualify for categorical exclusion or
for which categorical exclusion has
been revoked must undergo full envl-
§«.703
ronmental review In accordance with
16.705 and 18.706.
(b) The following specialized catego-
ries of ORD actions are eligible for
categories) exclusion from a detailed
NEPA review:
(1) Library or literature searches
and studies;
<3> 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 agnlnst 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.
M.7iS Environmental aucHmcnt and
finding of no ilgnlflcanl 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 CPR
1508.9 In order to determine whether
an BIS Is 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;
(3) 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 Is not antici-
pated to have a significant Impact on
the environment, the appropriate pro-
gram official shall prepare a FNSI In
accordance with 16.105(f). Pursuant to
|6.400(d>. 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
{6.706
ment. a FNSI may be prepared If
changes have been made In the pro-
posed action to eliminate any signifi-
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 Is necessary
without preparing a formal environ-
mental assessment. This determina-
tion may be made by applying the cri-
teria for preparation of an EIS In
f o.70>.
M.7M Environmental Impact statement
(a) Criteria for preparation. In per-
forming the environmental review, the
appropriate program official shall
assure that an EIS Is prepared when
any of the conditions under 18.108 (a)
through (g) exist or when:
(1) The proposed action may signifi-
cantly affect the environment through
the release of radioactive, hazardous
or toxic substances;
(3) 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 Cfll Ch. I (7.1-91 MWon)
(5) The proposed action Involves iuv
certain environmental effects or
highly unique environmental risks
which may be significant.
(b) ORD action* which mat rtgvfre
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.
It) As soon as possible after release
of the notice of Intent, the appropriate
program official shall ensure that a
draft EIS Is prepared In accordance
with subpart B and that the public Is
Involved In accordance with subpart D.
(3) Draft and final EISs shall be sent
to the Assistant Administrator for
ORD for approval.
(4) Pursuant to I 6.40l(b). a decision
on whether to undertake or fund a
project must be made in conformance
with the time frames Indicated.
(d) Record of decition. Before the
project Is undertaken or funded, the
appropriate program official shall pre-
pare. In accordance with 16.105 (g)
and (h). a record of decision In any
case where a final EIS has been Issued.
-------
rratocHon Agency
§4.706
Figure I. CmrlronBtntil rwlt* proem for 0X0 project*.
00
Are criteria for
categorical
etdwioM BMtT
(SeeK.764)
Document ftaMBngs.
EnvtroaoMBtat
review coespleted.
Conduct
eavtronmenUl
prepanttoaofRIS
netT(Sec
11700
Are any
poteatoHy
shEBUfcant
Begin pripirittsn
of draft BIS.
Prepare ftodlof of
MtlfBlfkttt
$6.MO
Subpart HEnvironmental Review
Procedure* lor Solid Watte Dem-
onttration Projects
I (.800 PorpoM.
This subpart amplifies the proce-
dures described In subparts A through
D by providing more specific environ-
mental review procedures for demon-
stration projects undertaken by the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response.
144 PR 04177. Nov. 0.1*7», u amended at 51
PR 32013. Sept. 1J. IOM1
I (.801 ' Applicability.
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.
I (.802 Criteria for preparing EIS..
The responsible official shall assure
that an EIS will be prepared when It is
determined that any of the conditions
In 16.108 exist.
144 PR (4177. Nov. (. 1*70. a* amended at 50
PR J03J3. June 29.1*051
I (.803 Environmental review proeeu.
(a) Environmental information. (1)
Environmental Information docu-
ment* shall be submitted to EPA by
grant applicants or contractors. If
there Is a question concerning the
need for a document, the potential
contractor or grantee should consult
with the appropriate project officer
for the grant or contract.
(2) The environmental Information
document shall contain the same sec-
tions specified for EIS's In subpart B.
Guidance alerting potential grantees
and contractors of the environmental
Information documents shall be In-
cluded in all grant application kits, at-
tached to letters concerning the sub-
mission of unsolicited proposals, and
Included with all requests for propos-
al.
(b) environmental review. An envi-
ronmental review will be conducted
before a grant or contract award Is
e. This review will Include the
tlon of an environmental as-
40 Cfl Ch. I (7-1-91 EdHle*)
sessment by the responsible official;
the appropriate Regional Administra-
tor's Input will Include his recommen-
dations on the n^ed for an EIS.
(c) Notice of intent and EtS. Based
on the environmental review If the cri-
teria In 16.802 of this part apply, the
responsible official will assure that a
notice of Intent and a draft EtS are
prepared. The responsible official may
request the appropriate Regional Ad-
ministrator to assist him In the prepa-
ration and distribution of the environ-
mental documents.
(d) Finding of no tiyniflcant impact.
If the environmental review Indicated
no significant environmental Impacts,
the responsible official will assure that
a FNSI Is prepared which lists any
mitigation measures necessary to
make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
(e) Timing of action. Pursuant to
|6.401. In no case shall a contract
or grant be awarded until the pre-
scribed 30-day review period tor a final
EIS has elapsed. Similarly, no action
shall be taken until the 30-day com-
ment period for a FNSI Is completed.
16.804 Record ot decision.
The responsible official shall pre-
pare a record of decision In any case
where final EIS has been Issued In ac-
cordance with 40 CPR 160S.2. 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.
Svbpart IEnvironmental Review
Procedure* for EPA Facility Sup-
port Activities
0(.»00 PurpoM.
This subpart amplifies the general
requirements described In subparU A
through D by providing environmental
procedures for the preparation of EISs
on construction and renovation of spe-
cial purpose facilities.
M.MI Definition*.
(a) The term tpectol purpoie facility
means a building or space, Including
land Incidental to Its use. which Is
wholly or predominantly utilized for
-------
the special purpoM of an agency and
not generally suitable for other uses.
as determined by the General Services
Administration.
(b) The term, program of recvire-
menti 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 Is usually pre-
pared for small-scale projects.
IMS AstMeaMllty.
(a) Action* covered. These proce-
dures apply to all new special purpose
facility construction, activities related
to this construction (e.g.. site acquisi-
tion and clearing), and any Improve-
ment* or modifications to facilities
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-
cllltles and Support Services Division,
Office of the Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resource
Mansgement;or by a regions! office.
(b) Action* excluded. This subpart
does not apply to those activities of
the Facilities 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.
(44 PR 64177. Nov.6. W». a* amended »t SI
PR 32613. Sept. IX 1*661
K.M3 Criteria for preparing EIS«.
la) Preliminary information. The re-
sponsible official shall request an envl-
{M04
ronmental Information document
from a construction contractor or con-
sulting architect/engineer employed
by EPA If he Is Involved in the plan-
ning, construction or modification of
special purpose facilities when his ac-
tivities have potential environmental
effect* external to .the facility. 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) £75 preparation criteria. The re-
sponsible official shall conduct an en-
vironmental review of all actions In-
volving construction of special purpose
facilities and Improvements to these
facilities. The responsible official shall
assure that an EIS will be prepared
when It Is determined that any of the
conditions In 18.108 of this part exist.
(44 PR 64177. Nov. 6.1979. M amended at 60
FR 98323. June 26. ItMl
I MM Environmental review steeeH.
(a) Environmental review. (1) An en-
vironmental review shall be conducted
when the program of requirements 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, Facilities 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 In making the review from
other cognizant EPA offices.
(2) Any environmental information
documents requested shall contain the
same sections listed for EISs In sub-
part B. Contractors and consultants
shall be notified in contractual docu
ments when an environmental Infor-
mation document must be prepared.
(b) Notice of intent, XIS. and FNSt.
The responsible official shall decide at
the completion of the Environmental
review whether there may be any sig-
nificant environmental Impacts. II
there could be significant environmen-
tal Impacts, a notice of Intent and an
EIS shall be prepared according to the
procedures under subpart* A. B. C and
§ 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 FN8I shall
list any mitigation measures necessary
to make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
(c) Timing of action. Pursuant to
16.401
-------
PrwtocHtHi Afency
provals pursuant to Part C of the
Clean Air Act <« VJB.C. section 7470
et seq.).
(4) Wastewater Treatment Construc-
tion Ormnta Program under section
301 of the Clean Water Act when ac-
tivities addressed In the facility plan
would have environmental effects
abroad.
(S) Other EPA activities at deter-
mined by OER and OIA (see
I 6.1007(c».
14.1663 Dcnnllloiu.
As used In this subpart, environment
means the natural and physical envi-
ronment and excludes social, economic
and other environments; global com-
ment la that area (land. air. water)
outside the Jurisdiction of any nation;
and re*pon*iote official Is either the
EPA Assistant Administrator or Re-
gional Administrator as appropriate
for the particular EPA program. Also,
an action ttgnWcanttt affects the en-
vironment If It does tigniflcant harm
to the environment even though on
balance the action may be beneficial
O to the environment. To the extent ap-
Jj pllcable. the responsible official shall
8 address the considerations set forth In
the CCQ Regulations under 40 CFR
1608.37 In determining significant
effect.
16.1664 EnTironraental role* ui4 ane«-
ment requirement*.
(a) Retevrch and demonstration
project*. 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 assist the responsible official
In determining whether an EIS Is nec-
essary. If It Is determined that the
action significantly affect* the envi-
ronment of the global commons, then
an EIS shall be prepared. If the under-
taking significantly affects a foreign
nation EPA shall prepare a unilateral,
bilateral or multilateral environmental
itudv. EPA shall afford the affected
natlon or International body or
ion an opportunity to part Id-
f 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 103 of the
MPR8A. For ocean dumping site des-
ignations prescribed pursuant to sec-
tion 103(c) of the afPRSA and 40 CFR
part 238, 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 31. 1974 (see 39
PR 37419). Also EPA shall prepare an
environmental Impact statement for
the establishment or revision of crite-
ria under section 103(a) of MPRSA.
(3) For Individual permlU Issued by
EPA under section 102(b) an environ-
mental assessment shall be made by
EPA. Pursuant to 40 CFR part 321,
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 102(a> of MPRSA. The Infor-
mation submitted under 40 CFR part
331 shall be sufficient to satisfy the
environmental assessment require-
ment
(c) EPA permitting and Hcenttng ot-
tMtiet. The appropriate Regional Ad-
ministrator Is responsible for conduct-
Ing concise environmental reviews
with regard to permits Issued under
section 3005 of the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (RCRA per-
mits), section 403 of the Clean Water
Act (NPDES permits), and section 168
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-
solidated permit regulations (40 CFR
§ 6.1005
parts 122 and 124) and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) regu-
lations (40 CFR part 82) shall satisfy
the environmental document require-
ment under section 2-4(b) of Execu-
tive Order 13114. Compliance with ap-
plicable requirements In part 124 of
the consolidated permit regulations
(40 CFR part 134) shall be sufficient
to satisfy the requirements to conduct
a concise environmental review for
permits subject to this paragraph.
(d) Waitevater treatment facility
planning. 40 CFR 6.806 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
shall also Include a 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. 1981, but on or before December
39. 1981. and facilities plans developed
after December 29,1981. 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 fry other Federal agencies
and other appropriate offtcialt. The
responsible officials shall consult with
other Federal agencies with relevant
expertise during the preparation of
the environmental document. As soon
as feasible after preparation of the en-
vironmental document, the responsi-
ble 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.
(46 PR 3364. Jan. 14,1981. at amended at 50
FR 26323. June 18.1S85J
16.1666 Lead or cooperating agency.
^(a) Lead Agency- Section 3-3 of Exec-
toe Order 12114 requires the cre-
40 Cn Ch. I (7-1-91 Edition)
atlon of a tead 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 1801.6 of the CEQ regulations.
(b) Cooperating Agency. Under sec-
tion 2-4(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 1601.6. 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.
14.1666 EientaUoni and eonilderatloiu.
Under section 2-5 (b) and (c) of the
Executive Order, Federal, agencies
may provide for modifications In the
contents, tuning 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 2-6(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 2-6(c). The De-
partment of State and the Council on
Environmental Quality shall be con-
sulted as soon as possible on the utili-
zation of such exemptions.
111667 Implementation.
(a) OvenlghL OER Is responsible for
overseeing the Implementation of
these procedures and shall consult
with OIA wherever appropriate. OIA
shall be utilized for making formal
contacts with the Department of
State. OER shall assist the responsible
officials In carrying out their responsi-
bilities under these procedures.
-------
InvlroniMwntal frotg
KJ
(b) Information exchange. OER with
the aid of OIA. shall assist the Depart-
rnent of State and the Council on En-
vironmental Quality In developing the
Informational exchange on environ-
mental review activities with foreign
nations.
(c) Unidentified ocHrttte*. The re-
sponsible official shall consult with
OER and OIA to establish the type of
environmental review or document ap-
propriate for any new EPA activities
or requirements Imposed upon EPA by
statute. International agreement or
other agreement*.
AFFCMDIX A SmnMntr or Pioct-
onma OK FLOODMJUH MANiancDrr
AMD WRLANM PmoncnoM
Contents:
Section 1 General
Section 3 Purpose
Sections Policy
Section 4 Definitions
Sections Applicability
Section* Requirements
Section 7 Implementation
Section 1 General
a, Executive Order 110*8 entitled "Flood-
plain Management" dsled May 24. 1071. re-
quires Federal sceneles to evaluate the pe-
tentUI effecU of ictlons It may take In a
floodplaln to avoid adversely Impactlnt
floodplalns wherever possible. to ensure
that It* planning programs and budget re-
quests renect consideration of flood hasards
and floodplaln management, Ineludlnt the
restoration and preservation of such land
areas as natural undeveloped ftoodplalns,
and Co prescribe procedure* to Implement
the policies and procedures of this Execu-
tive Order. Guidance for Implementation of
the Executive Order has been provided by
the U.S. Water Resources Council In Its
Floodplaln Management Guidelines dated
February 10. 1*78 (see 40 PR 6030).
b. Executive Order 11MO entitled "Protec-
tion of Wetland*", dated May 24. 1*77. re-
quires Federal asendea to take action to
avoid adversely Impacting wetland* wherev-
er possible, to minimize wetlands destruc-
tion and to preserve the values of wetland*.
and to prescribe procedures to implement
the policies and procedure* of this Execu-
tive Order.
e. It Is the Intent of these Executive
Orders that, wherever possible. Federal
sceneles Implement the floodplalns/wet-
lands requirements through existing proce-
dures. such as those Internal procedures es-
tablished to Implement the National Envl-
ft. 6, Aap. A
ronmental Policy Act (NEPA) and OMB A-
6 review procedures. In those Instances
where the environmental Impacts of a pro-
posed action are not significant enough to
require an environmental Impact statement
(EIS) pursuant to section 102(2XC> of
NEPA, or where programs are not subject to
the requirements of NEPA. alternative but
equivalent floodplain/wetlands evaluation
and notice procedures must be established.
Section 2 Purpose
a. The purpose of this Statement of Proce-
dures Is to set forth Agency policy and guid-
ance for carrying out the provisions of Exec-
utive Order* 119M and 11 WO.
b. EPA program office* shall amend exist-
ing regulations and procedures to Incorpo-
rate the policies and procedures set forth In
this Statement of Procedure*.
e. To the extent possible. EPA shall ac-
commodate the requirement* of Executive
Orders 11088 and 11MO through the Agency
NEPA procedures contained In 40 CFR part
g.
Section $ Policy
a. The Agency shall avoid wherever possi-
ble the long and short term Impact* associ-
ated with the destruction of wetlands and
the occupancy and modification of flood-
plains and wetlands, and avoid direct and In-
direct support of floodplaln and wetlands
development wherever there Is a practicable
alternative.
b. The Agency shall Incorporate flood-
plain management goals and wetland* pro-
tection considerations Into Its planning, reg-
ulatory, and dedstonmaklng procem*. It
shall also promote the preservation and res-
toration of floodplaln* so that their natural
and beneficial values can be realised. To the
extent possible EPA shall:
(1> Reduce the hazard and risk ol flood
loss and wherever It Is possible to avoid
direct or Indirect adverse impact on flood-
plain*:
(2) Where there Is no practical alternative
to locating In a floodplaln. minimize the
Impact of flood* on human safety, health.
and welfare, as well ss the natural environ-
ID Mil!
(3> Restore and preserve natural and ben-
eficial values served by floodptalns;
(4) Require the construction of EPA struc-
ture* and facilities to be In accordance with
the standards and criteria, of the regula-
tions promulgated pursuant to the National
Flood Insurance Program:
(5) Identify floodplaln* which require res-
toration and preservation and recommend
management programs necessary to protect
these floodplalns and to Include such con-
siderations as part of on going planning pro-
grams; and
ft. 6, App. A
(«) Provide the public with early and con-
tinuing Information concerning floodplaln
management and with opportunities for
participating In decision making Including
the (evaluation of) tradeoffs among compet-
ing alternative*.
e. The Agency shall Incorporate wetlands
protection conilderatlon* Into It* planning.
regulatory, and declslonmaklng processes. It
shall minimize the destruction, loss, or deg-
radation of wetlands and preserve and en-
hance the natural and beneficial values of
wetlands. Agency activities shall continue to
be carried out consistent with the Adminis-
trator's Decision Statement No. 4 dated
February 21. 1071 entitled "EPA Policy to
Protect the Nation's Wetlands."
Section 4 Definition*
a. Bate Flood means that flood which ha*
a one percent chance of occurrence In any
given year (also known aa a 100-year flood).
This term Is used In the National Flood In-
surance Program (NFIP) to Indicate the
minimum level of flooding to be used by a
community In Its floodplaln management
regulations.
b. Batt floodplaln means the land area
covered by a 100-year flood'(one percent
chance floodplaln). Also see definition of
floodplaln.
e. Flood or floodlnp means a general and
temporary condition of partial or complete
Inundation of normally dry land areas from
the overflow ol Inland and/or tidal waters.
and/or the unusual and rapid accumulation
or runoff of surface wateis from any source.
or flooding from any other source.
d. rtoodvlain means the lowland and rela-
tively flat areas adjoining Inland and coastal
waters and other floodprone areas such as
offshore Ulsnd*. Including at a minimum.
that area subject to a one percent or greater
chance of flooding In any given year. The
base floodplaln shall be uaed to designate
the 100-year floodplaln (one percent chance
floodplain). The critical action floodplaln I*
defined as the 100-yesr floodplaln (0.2 per-
cent chance floodplaln).
e. floodproQAnt means modification of In-
dividual structure* and faculties, their sites.
and their content* to protect against struc-
tural failure, to keep water out or to reduce
effects of water entry.
f. JflnlmUe means to reduce to the smsll-
est possible amount or degree.
g. Practicable means capable of being
done within existing constraints. The test of
what Is practicable depends upon the situa-
tion and Includes consideration of the perti-
nent fsetors such ss environment, communi-
ty wel/sre, cost, or technology.
h. Preserve means to prevent modification
to the natural floodplaln environment or to
maintain It as closely ss possible to It* natu-
ral state.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-91
I. Rettore means to re-establish a setting
or environment In which the natural func-
tions of the floodplaln can again operate.
J. Wetland* means those areas that are In-
undated by surface or ground water with a
frequency sufficient to support and under
normal circumstances does or would support
a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life
that requires saturated or sessonslly sstu-
rated soil condition* for growth and repro-
duction. Wetlands generally Include
swsmps. marines, bog*, and similar area*
*uch as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows.
river overflows, mud flats, and natural
ponds.
Section S Applicability
a. The Executive Orders apply to activities
of Federal sgencles pertaining to < I) acquir-
ing, managing, and disposing of Federal
lands and faculties. (2) providing Federally
undertaken, financed, or asstited construc-
tion and Improvements, and (3) conducting
Federal activities and programs affecting
land use. Including but not limited to water
and related land resource*-planning, regu-
lating, and licensing activities.
b. These procedures shall apply to EPA's
programs as follows: (I) All Agency actions
involving construction of facilities or man-
agement of lands or property. This will re-
quire amendment of the EPA Facilities
Management Manual (October 1073 and re-
visions thereafter).
(2) All Agency actions where the NEPA
process spplles. This would Include the pro-
grams under sections 300/402 of the Clean
Water Act pertaining to new source permit-
ting and section 201 of the Clean Water Act
pertaining to wastewater treatment con-
struction grants.
(3) All agency actions where there Is suffi-
cient Independent statutory authority to
carry out the floodptaln/wetlanda proce-
dures.
(4) In program area* where there la no
EIS requirement nor clear statutory author-
ity for EPA to require procedural Implemen-
tation. EPA shall continue to provide lead-
ership and offer guidance so thst the vslue
of floodplsln management and wetlands
protection can be understood and carried
out to the maximum extent practicable In
c. These procedures shall not apply to any
permitting or source review programs of
EPA once such authority has been trans- CL *"
ferred or delegated to a State. However. P A
EPA shall, to the extent possible, require 9°
States to provide equivalent effort to assure ?£ £
support for the objectives of these proce- S
dures ss part of the state assumption proc- 4x
-------
Section*
a. PloodplauVWeUandi review of pro-
posed Agency actions.
(1) /loodptofn/lftUaiirfi Determination
Before undertaking' an Agency action, each
program office must determine whether or
not the action wfll be located to or affect a
floodplaln or wetlands. The Agency ahall
utilise map* prepared by the Federal Insur-
ance Administration of the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency (Flood Insur-
ance Rate Maps or Flood Hasard Boundary
Maps), Fish and Wildlife Service (National
Wetlands Inventory Haps), and other ap-
propriate agencies to determine whether a
proposed action to located In or wltt likely
affect a floodpialn or wetlands. If there to
no noodplaln/wetlands Impact Identified.
the action may proceed without further
consideration of the remaining procedure*
set forth below.
(2) forty Puttie Notice-When It to appar-
ent that a proposed or potential agency
action to likely to Impact a floodplaln or
wetlands, the public should be Informed
through appropriate public notice proce-
dures.
(3) IToo environmental Impact statement (EI8I to
N> prepared pursuant to 40 CFR part 6. the
noodplaln/wetlands assessment shall be
prepared concurrently with these analyse*
and shall be Included In the BA or EI8. In
all other eases, a floodplain/vetlandM as-
sessment shall be prepared. Assessments
shall consist of a description of the pro-
posed action, a discussion of II* effect on the
floodplsln/wetlands, and ahall also describe
the alternative* considered.
(4) Pn6He Review of Auettmentt-For
proposed action* Impacting noodplaln/wet-
lands where an EA or EIS to prepared, the
opportunity for public review will be provid-
ed through the EI8 provisions contained In
40 CFR part* 6. 38. or 38. where appropri-
ate. In other case*, an equivalent public
notice of the floodplaln/wetland* assess-
ment shall be made consistent with the
public Involvement requirement* of the ap-
plicable program.
(6) Minimise, Restore or PfeserceIf
there to no practicable alternative to locat-
ing In or affecting the floodplaln or wet-
lands, the Agency shall aet to minimise po-
tential harm to the floodplaln or wetlands.
The Agency shall also act to restore and
preserve the natural and beneficial values of
floodplalns and wetlands as part of the
analysis of all alternatives under consider-
Pt.«, A**. A n. 4, AT*. A
(6) Agency Decision-After consideration
of alternative actions, at they have been
modified In the preceding analysis, the
Agency shall select the desired alternative.
For all Agency actions proposed to be In or
affecting a noodplaln/wetlandi. the Agency
ahall provide further public notice announc-
ing this decision. This decision shall be ac-
companied by a Statement of Finding*, not
to exceed three page*. This Statement shall
Include: (I) The reaadns why the proposed
action must be located In or affect the
floodplaln or wetlands; (III a description of
significant fact* considered In making the
decision to locate In or affect the floodplaln
or wetlands Including alternative altos and
actions: (III) a statement Indicating whether
the proposed action conforms to applicable
State or local floodplaln protection stand-
ards: (Iv) a description of the steps taken to
design or modify the proposed action to
minimise potential harm to or within the
floodplaln or wetlands; and (vl a statement
Indicating how the propoud action affect*
the natural or beneficial value* of the flood-
plain or wetlands. If the provision* of 40
CFR part 6 apply, the Statement of Find-
Ing* may be Incorporated In the final BIS or
tat the environmental assessment In other
rise*, notice should be placed In the Pram-
&L RBOISTBB or other local medium and
copies sent to Federal. Slate, and local agen-
cies and other entitles which submitted
comment* or are otherwise concerned with
the floodptaln/wetlands assessment. For
floodplaln action* subject to Office of Man-
agement and Budget (OMB) Circular A-BS.
the Agency ihall send the Statement of
Findings to State and areawlde A-M clear-
inghouse In the geographic area affected. At
least 18 working day* shall be allowed for
public and Inlerageney review of the State-
ment of Findings.
(7) AnOatrttattont/ApproprtattoraAny
requests for new authorization* or appro-
priations transmitted to OMB ihall Include.
a floodpialn/wetlands assessment and. for
floodplaln Impacting actions, a Statement of
Findings. If a proposed action will be located
In a floodplaln or wetlands.
b. Lead agency concept To the maximum
extent possible, the Agency shall relay on
the lead agency concept to carry out the
provisions set forth In section 6.a of this ap-
pendix. Therefore, when EPA and another
Federal agency have related action*. EPA
ihall work with the other agency to Identify
which agency shall take the lead In satisfy-
ing these procedural requirement* and
thereby avoid duplication of efforts.
c. Additional flootptain management pro-
visions relating to federal property and fa-
cUirles.
(I) Construction Actlvttlet-t&A con-
trolled structures and facilities must be con-
structed In accordance with existing criteria
and standards set forth under the NFIP and
must Include mitigation of adverse Impact*
wherever feasible. Deviation from these re-
quirement* may occur only to the extent
NFIP standards are demonstrated a* Inap-
propriate for a given structure or facility.
(2) flood Protection JreosttrcsIf newly
constructed structures or facilities are to be
located In a floodplaln. accepted floodproof-
Ing and other flood protection measure*
shall be undertaken. To achieve flood pro-
tection. EPA shall, wherever practicable,
elevate structure* above the base flood level
rather than filling land.
(3) Reitontton and PreservationAs part
of any EPA plan or action, the potential for
restoring and preserving floodplaln* and
wetlands so that their natural and benefi-
cial value* can be realized must be consid-
ered and Incorporated Into the plan or
action wherever feasible.
(4) Properly Vied by PuMle-tf property
used by the public has suffered damage or to
located In an Identified flood huard 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.
(8) TrantferafKPA Property-When prop-
erty In flood plains to proposed tor lease.
easement, right-of-way, or disposal to non-
Federal public or private parties. EPA shall
reference In the conveyance those uses that
are restricted under Federal. State and local
floodplaln regulations and attach other re-
striction* to uses of the property as may be
deemed appropriate. Notwithstanding. EPA
shall consider withholding such properties
from conveyance.
Section 7 fmplementatlon
a. Pursuant to section 2. the EPA program
otllees shall amend existing regulations,
procedure*, and guidance, as appropriate, to
Incorporate the policies and procedures set
forth In this Statement of Procedures. Such
amendment* shall be made within six
months of the date of these Procedure*.
b. The Office of External Affair* (OEA) to
responsible for the oversight of the Imple-
mentation of this Statement of Procedures
and shall be given advanced opportunity to
review amendments to regulations, proce-
dures, and guidance. OEA shall coordinate
effort* with the program offices to develop
necessary manuals and more specialised
supplementary guidance to carry out this
Statement of Procedure*.
(44 PR 64171. Nov. 6. 1970. ss amended at 80
PR 28323. June 28.1MSI
40 era CK i (r-1-91 fdm*fi)
PART 7MOMfHSCXIMINATION IN
PROGRAMS RECEIVING FEDERAL
ASSISTANCE FROM THE ENVHION-
MENTAl PROTECTION AGENCY
««** A Osnsral
Bee.
7.10 Purpose of this part.
7.18 Applicability.
7.20 Responsible agency officers.
7.28 Definition*.
stls *f |M». Cats*, HalUml
-------
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
4
$ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
%(-o,v«:**:
FE02B 1992
RECORD OF DECISION
MONTICELLO B-2 SURFACE LIGNITE MINE
TITUS COUNTY, TEXAS
BACKGROUND; The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
determined, pursuant to its responsibilities under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), that the issuance of a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to
Texas Utilities Mining Company (TUMCO) represented a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment
and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was warranted to
evaluate the potential environmental consequences of this Federal
permit action. The Draft EIS and Final EIS were completed in April
1990 and September 1991, respectively. This Record of Decision
(ROD) is the final step in EPA's NEPA review process and has .been
prepared in accordance with the regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR Part 1505) and EPA (40 CFR Part 6)
for "implementing the Procedural provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act."
SUMMARY OF MAJOR CONSIDERATIONS IN THE NEPA PROCESS; One area Of
consideration involved the evaluation of reasonable alternatives.
This included the assessed effects of no action and the future
environment without the project, and alternative fuel sources for
the existing Monticello Steam Electric station. Alternative energy
sources such as geothermal, solar, nuclear, hydro-electric and wind
were not considered feasible. Also, in considering power plant
modifications, alternative fuels such as western coal, natural gas,
and municipal waste were evaluated but not considered viable fuel
alternatives. In evaluating alternative lignite reserves, power
plant proximity, existing fuel transportation facilities, and low
production costs resulted in TUMCO's selection of the B-2 area
expansion alternative.
Alternative mining methodologies were evaluated. underground
mining was judged undesirable due to numerous and significant
safety hazards, low recovery rates, high potential for subsidence,
end high production costs. Surface overburden removal methods
evaluated included draglines, bucketwheel excavators, and truck and
shovel systems. Draglines were selected based on the nature of
anticipated mining conditions and the flexibility offered by a
dragline system (e.g. allows for the placement of unsuitable
material). The "mixed spoil** overburden handling alternative was
selected over the "topsoil replacement over mixed spoil" by TUMCO
because it was judged to have physical and chemical advantages and
to be more cost-effective, resulting in an estimated savings of
$9,000 per acre. The use of this "mixed spoil" technique at other
areas in the Monticello mine (e.g. Winfield) has resulted in the
E-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
creation of a new prime farmland soil, the Grayrock soils, with
slopes of five percent or less. In 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 EIS assessment concluded that re*
establishment of vegetation is technically feasible using the
"mixed spoil" alternative of overburden handling. The EIS 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 vere evaluated. The types
of equipment considered included shovels, front-end loaders, bach-
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 TJ.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 EPA'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 MPDBS permit.
E-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Mining operations vill alter the topography, geology and soils on
approximately 6,174 acres during the life of the project. Short-
tern, adverse impacts on topography should be nitigated by contem-
poraneous reclamation vith no predicted irretrieveable commitments
or long-tern cumulative adverse impacts. Overburden removal vill
permanently alter the geology and stratigraphic relationships of
individual strata, constituting an unavoidable, long-term, adverse
impact and irretrieveable commitment of resources, soils vill be
impacted from increased bulk densities, reduced permeabilities and
altered textures. Cumulative effects include replacing approxi-
mately 30,000 acres of native soils vith reconstructed mixed soils
following mining. EPA's assessment concluded land productivity
following mining vas potentially beneficial for the short-term
based on the RCT's requirement for TUMCO 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 vill be altered during
mining and complete resaturation may take from 12 to 48 years.
Upon resaturation, the ground water flew regime should be similar
to pro-mine conditions, but vith increases in sulfate, total dis-
solved solids r iron and manganese concentrations. Degradation of
groundvater vill decrease vith 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 Honticello B-2 and other TUMCO
mining projects. Because TUMCO is responsible to replace the water
supply of an owner of .interest in real property vho 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 vere not considered major.
Local communities and area residents vill be affected during short-
term and long-tern operations. Construction and operation of the
proposed mine vill 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, Ripley Church and Damascus Church) when mining
operations are very near the nine boundary. Increased noise levels
nay also adversely impact residents, particularly at night. Local
transportation networks vill be adversely impacted from increased
traffic and road relocations. Increased demand for community
facilities and services vill cause some adverse impacts, including
cumulative effects. Land values on adjacent or nearby properties
nay decrease for the short-tern from mining operations, but after
reclamation is complete, this impact is potentially reversible and
affected land values should increase again.
E-4
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Streams vill 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 Beet EPA's NPDES
pernit limits established to Maintain water 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. Army Corps of Engineers (USCE) and
others as part of the Final EXS, has been accepted and made
effective by EPA as a part of TDKCO's 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 EPA's NPDES permit and the uses's
Section 404 permit.
Mining operations vill 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 vill change the ground level emanation rate of radon. EPA'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,
particulates end radon do not pose a serious public health threat
or constitute a significant adverse impact to the general public.
However, the BIS did conclude the projected increases in noise
levels and particulates will result in minor or major, adverse
impacts on local residents, depending on prevailing conditions such
as wind direction and lade of rainfall, the level of mining
activities, and the sensitivity of the individual(s) affected.
The soeioeconomic* of local communities vill 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
communities 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
vould allow for capital improvements and the purchase of educa-
tional supplies and equipment, and could result in additional
services 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 arcneological
sites, vill be lost due to mining activities. However, EPA's
Programmatic Agreement, executed in compliance with Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act, vill lessen these adverse
impacts through the planned survey, testing and/or mitigation of
significant sites (i.e. listed in or "eligible" for listing in the
National Register). These data gathering activities over the life
of the B-2 and other Monticello sine areas have the potential to
expand our knowledge of the history and prehistory of the affected
area.
Within the 6,174 acre sine 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-ten 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.
PRECISION: The EPA considered all the information gathered in the
NEPA review for this NPDES permit action, including the BIS
analyses, comments received on the Draft and Final EISs, EPA'c
responses to comments on the Draft and Final EISs, 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 NPDES 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 ZIS 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 TUHCO for the construction and
operation of the Monticello B-2 lignite mine expansion project in
Titus County, Texas.
icial:
B. J. Wynne
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
APPENDIX F
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Action: \j v :
Council on ::: .
Environmental j
Quality '
I^Enviro'nriltentJ.rX^'^ : '
. .* ; -v.^v ' ' )
ftVttyv^XiftffltCjfltT^l '%%$('^f<$£
f^Sff^fOffffXlKfl* \^5*^wt *& > !
A signed decision by a responsible official resulting in an award, approval, notification, II
cancellation, termination use, or commitment of federal funds or property. |
Created by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, this Executive Office of
the 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 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 §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 EIS preparation.
The impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when
added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what
agency (federal and 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.
Evaluatior.5 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 ofland 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 (sucn 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.
1 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 (EIS) 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
prepared.
F-2
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 484 1
APRIL 1994
Environmental
Impact Statement
(HIS):. ,, '.;;.::
A detailed, succinct document reauired 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 EIS should be prepared. An EIS provides the public and decision makers with dear,
written documentation of possible environmental effects.
Finding of No :
SiRrtifccanf Impact
A document providing succinct evidence of why a proposed action will not have a
significant impact on trie environment. An accepted FNSI nullifies the requirement for
submission or an environmental impact statement (EIS).
1 Major Federal
Action;;-: .>&x-\- .
^,:-^" :
Includes actions with effects that may be major and that are potentially subject to Federal |
control and responsibility. Major reinforces, but does not have a meaning independent of
significantly (defined in 40 CFR §1508.27) (also see Actions above).
Mitigation: i ,-.
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 oy repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the
affected environment; d) reducing or eliminating the impact over time 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.
. .
Envuttnmdttal . .' -
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 Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) which enhances
and encourages NEPA compliance and also advises the President on environmental
affairs.
A brief notice placed in the Federal Register by EPA considering a major action informs
readers that an EIS 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 (POC) within EPA to answer questions about the proposed action and the
EPA has defined pollution prevention as "source reduction" as that term is explained
under the Pollution Prevention Act, as well as protecting natural resources through
conservation or increased efficiency in the use of energy, water, or other materials.
I The proposed action issuing agency. EPA is responsible for all NEPA compliance activities. ||
Recoid of :Becision :
^i^^^Sl^lt-
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 nas beenprepared on a
proposed major Federal action and the alternatives considered by EPA. Furthermore, a II
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 1
be made available to the public and disseminated to parties that commented on the draft 1
and final EIS. |
F-3
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES
EPA 4841
APRIL 1994
Scope:
II The range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in an EIS (40 CFR 1508.25). ||
Scoping;
An earl
agencies.
rly and open process of fostering participation and input from the public and other
ies. 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 process provides
an opportunity for affected parties to request time limits and page limits of an EIS (40 CFR
§1501.7(b); 1501.8).
Significant:
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.
Tiering
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. O. 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 150-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 lie 250-500 feet south of the site beyond a ruderal 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. Ac
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 3.1,3.2, 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 comer 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 wouid 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 Lake 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 roie 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.
II . /(>. 1O
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 pioceas confirmed that unavoidable significant
environmental impacts would not result from the pmpnyd' project. Consequently, the EPA
has made a preliminary decision not to prepare an environmental
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 qihmin*^ JQ ^e EPA. for
consideration within 30 calendar days from the date of this notice at 75 Hawthorne St. San
Francisco, CA 94105, Mafl Code P-3-1. No administrative action will be taken by the 'EPA
on die project before the end of me 30 day period.
If there are any requests for additional information, please do not fr^sitatf to can the
Laboratory Support Section at (415) 744-1491.
Regional Administrator
Chief, Engineering, Planning and Architecture Branch Date
Facilities Management and Services Division
G-10
-------
NEPA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EPA FACILITIES EPA 4841
APPENDIX A APML 1994
CONDITIONS
Introduction
The following special conditions must be incorporated into the project description and
implemented as part 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
sewerline 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
sewerline 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 sprinkJered. 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 for
hazardous materials designed for new employees, including annual refresher
courses; and
o precautions taken in the handling of compressed gases (Howard pers. comm.
University of California, Berkeley, Campus Planning Office, and EIP
Associates 1989).
4.10 Upgrade the Existing Water-line (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 fircfighting 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 FACILITIES EPA 4841
4.11 Install a Security System APRIL 1994
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 particulate 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 Ah* 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.
10.2 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
10.3 Comply with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code and the University Policy
on Sefemk 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. t 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).
II.1 Stop Work if Cultural 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
(Holman & Associates 1989).
Measures Required to Mitigate Potentially Significant Impacts
4.3 Ensure the Project's Indoor Areas Are Above Potential Future Hood Levels.
Determine the Risk of Site Flooding, and Reduce This Risk to an Acceptable Level.
If 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 Ail Contamination On or Immediately Adjacent
To the Project Site Prior to the Tune 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. Q-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
------- |