United States
Environmental Protection Agency-Region 2
Office of Policy and Management
Environmental Impacts Branch
Environmental
Review Manual
For Wastewater
Facilities Planning
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL" REVIEW MANUAL
FOR
WASTEWATER FACILITIES
PLANNING
Prepared by:
United States
Environmental Protection Agency - Region 2
Office of Policy and Management
Environmental Impacts Branch
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10278
With Assistance from:
QROUP
Maguire Group Inc.
Architects/Engineers/Planners
One Court-Street
New Britain, Connecticut 06051
December 1987
-------
RESERVATION
This document is intended to summarize existing statutes, regulations,
and Agency policies. It is not intended to create, and does not
create, any requirements or policies which may be relied upon by third
parties outside the Agency. In the event that any of the information
set forth herein is inconsistent with existing statutes, regulations,
or Agency policy, such existing statutes, regulations, and policy
shall govern. The Agency reserves the right to take actions alleged
to be at variance with the information provided in this document.
-------
PREFACE
This Environmental Review Manual is designed to assist the states in
carrying out their environmental review responsibilities under the
Construction Grants and State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. The
objective of this manual is to ensure that environmental resources are
recognized early in the planning process, and protected through proper
planning and decision-making.
In addition, this manual will enhance the states understanding of the
procedures and requirements of the major environmental laws, regula-
tions, and policies that affect these programs, in order to accomplish
the quality environmental reviews that both the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and the states are striving for.
Each chapter of this manual focuses on a specific environmental
resource, discusses the legislative/regulatory framework covering that
resource and outlines procedures to be followed during environmental
review. To enhance the value of the manual, copies of the various
applicable regulations are included in the Appendices, as well as
sample documentation, checklists and other pertinent information. The
procedures set forth in this manual should serve as the framework for
reviewing facility plans and environmental information documents
(EID's) to assure compliance with the goals of the National Environ-
mental Policy Act (NEPA).
EPA is in the process of establishing policies for implementing the
transition from the grant program to the loan program. A guidance
document for use in structuring a State Environmental Review Process
for implementation of the SRF program is also included as an appendix
to this manual. More information and guidance concerning these
policies, as well as EPA's and the states' roles, will be provided to
the states as it becomes available.
This manual has been designed as a looseleaf which can be easily
updated to incorporate changes in procedures, rules and regulations.
We hope that it will serve as a valuable resource for the state's
environmental reviewers.
i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pane
Preface i
Table of Contents ii
List of Figures iv
CHAPTERS
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose, Content and Format of this Manual 1-1
1.2 Overview of the National Environmental Policy Act... 1-1
1.3 Overview of the Construction Grants/State Revolving
Fund Loan Program in Relation to NEPA 1-2
1.4 NEPA and State Delegation 1-2
1.5 Preparation of Draft Environmental Documents
by Delegated States 1-3
1.6 Determination of Whether or Not to Prepare an EIS .. 1-4
2. Population Projections and Environmental Constraints
Analyses 2-1
3. Water Resources 3-1
4. Wetlands 4-1
5. Floodplains 5-1
6. Air Quality 6-1
7. Endangered Species 7-1
8. Significant Agricultural Lands 8-1
9. Cultural Resources 9-1
10. Wild and Scenic Rivers 10-1
11. Coastal Zones 11-1
12. Construction and Operational-Related Impacts 12-1
13. Social and Economic Impacts 13-1
14. Other Environmental Laws and Regulations 14-1
APPENDICES
A. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS
1. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 (NEPA)
2. COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REGULATIONS - 40 CFR PART
1500
3. CONSOLIDATED EPA NEPA REGULATIONS - 40 CFR PART 6
4. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11988 - FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
5. EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990 - PROTECTION OF WETLANDS
B. SAMPLE DRAFT NEPA DOCUMENTATION
1. SAMPLE OUTLINE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2. FNSI/EA
3. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
4. 5-YEAR REEVALUATION PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT
5. SAMPLE EA LANGUAGE ON NAAQS ATTAINMENT STATUS
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
C. USDA FARMLAND PROTECTION FORM AND REGULATIONS
D. AGENCY CONTACTS
E. ENDANGERED SPECIES INFORMATION
F. LIST OF WILD AMD SCENIC RIVERS
G. MITIGATION MEASURES/SPECIAL GRANT CONDITIONS
1. MITIGATION MEASURES
2. SPECIAL GRANT CONDITIONS
H. FACILITIES PLAN REVIEW-NEPA CHECKLIST
I. SUGGESTIONS FOR PREPARING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS/PUBLIC
ANNOUNCEMENTS/CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS
J. CRITERIA FOR STRUCTURING A STATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
K. ABBREVIATIONS USED
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
LIST OF FIGURES
TITLE FOLLOWING PAGE
Environmental Review Procedures
Under CFR Part 6 1-4
NEPA Process 1-4
Procedures for Population Projections
and Constraints Analyses Review 2-2
Procedures for Water Resources
Review, Surface Water 3-3
Procedures for Water Resources
Review, Aquifers 3-4
Sole Source Aquifers in Region II 3-4
Procedures for Wetland Review 4-3
Sample Wetland Delineation 4-3
Wetland Cross Section 4-3
Procedures for Floodplain Review 5-2
Sample Floodplain Delineation 5-3
Floodplain Cross Section 5-3
Procedures for Air Quality Review 6-3
Procedures for Endangered Species
Review 7-2
Procedures for Significant Agricultural
Lands Review 8-4
Procedures for Cultural Resources Review 9-3
Procedures for Wild and Scenic Rivers
Review 10-2
Procedures for Coastal Zone Review 11-1
Procedures for Social Impacts Review 13-5
iv
-------
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose, Content and Format of this Manual
The purpose of this manual is to assist reviewers of proposed
wastewater facilities projects in ensuring compliance with NEPA
and other relevant environmental statutes. The manual identifies
these statutes and outlines procedures for compliance.
Chapters 2-11 describe the legislative and regulatory background
and the environmental review procedures for the following envi-
ronmental resources:
Chapter 2 - Population Projections and Environmental
Constraints Analyses
Chapter 3 - Water Resources (Surface Water and Sole Source
Aquifers)
Chapter 4 - Wetlands
Chapter 5 - Floodplains
Chapter 6 - Air Quality
Chapter 7 - Endangered Species
Chapter 8 - Significant Agricultural Lands
Chapter 9 - Cultural Resources
Chapter 10 - Wild and Scenic Rivers
Chapter 11 - Coastal Zones
Chapters 12 & 13 address Construction and Operational-Related
Impacts and Social and Economic Impacts. Chapter 14 discusses
the statutes and review procedures for other, less commonly
encountered environmental resources (National Natural Landmarks
and Coastal Barriers).
1.2 Overview of the National Environmental Policy Act
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq., has as two of its purposes the establishment of a
national policy for the environment and the provision for the
establishment of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The
CEQ has promulgated regulations for implementing procedures to
achieve NEPA goals, 40 CFR 1500 et seq., as amended. The inten-
tion of the CEQ regulations and NEPA itself is that public
officials and agencies must consider the environmental conse-
quences of their actions and, to the extent practicable, avoid or
minimize the adverse environmental impacts of their actions.
Agencies are required under NEPA, Section 102(c) to prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS) for any major federal action
which could significantly affect "the quality of the human
environment". This requirement serves as the most significant
mechanism for implementing NEPA. NEPA requires consideration of
the following issues: (1) the environmental impact of the
1-1
-------
proposed action, (2) any adverse environmental effects which
cannot be avoided with proposed implementation, (3) alternatives
to the proposed action, (4) the relationship between short-term
and long-term effects, and (5) any irreversible and irretrievable
commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed
acti on.
1.3 Overview of the Construction Grants/State Revolving Fund Loan
Program in Relation to NEFA
The Clean Water Act provides funds for EPA to make grants for the
construction of wastewater facilities. The 1987 Amendments to
the Act provide for phasing out the Construction Grants program
by implementing a State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan program. Under
the new program, municipalities will no longer apply for EPA
grants to fund specific projects. Instead, the states will
receive EPA capitalization grants and will use these, in conjunc-
tion with state matching funds, to award low interest loans for
wastewater facilities projects.
Both the grant and loan programs for the construction of waste-
water facilities may have a considerable effect on environmental
quality by (1) providing a means to control point sources of
water pollution, and (2) by introducing construction and opera-
tional-related environmental impacts. Recognizing these poten-
tial effects, federal and state agencies have incorporated
environmental review requirements into the wastewater facilities
planning process. Specifically, projects involving federal grant
assistance for wastewater facility construction are subject to
the requirements of NEPA and must, therefore, undergo an envir-
onmental review process. Construction grants and loans for
wastewater facilities may not be approved until they have com-
pleted the NEPA, or a similar, review process.
1.4 NEPA and State Delegation
In the implementation of the construction grants program, EPA
attempts to eliminate unnecessary duplicative reviews and to use
the state's resources and awareness of local conditions to the
greatest extent possible. Pursuant to 40 CFR 35 EPA may enter
into a written agreement with the state for determining the
adequacy of review documents. EPA may also agree to allow the
state to approve facilities plans, design plans and specifi-
cations, operation and maintenance manuals, and any other ele-
ments determined to be appropriately delegated, as the program
permits.
1-2
-------
EPA's regulations establish environmental review procedures for
the wastewater facility Construction Grants Program (40 CFR
6.500-6.514). These procedures cover responsibilities for
environmental documentation in preparing Categorical Exclusions
(CE), Environmental Information Documents (EID), Environmental
Assessments (EA), Findings of No Significant Impact (FNSI), and
Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). These procedures are
described in the following section and are diagrammed in Figures
1 and 2.
Although the authority for reviewing the facilities plan and EID
can be delegated to the state, EPA is still required to retain
certain NEPA responsibilities (40 CFR Part 6.508). Thus, while
states may be delegated the responsibility for preparation of
draft environmental assessments, EPA must review and finalize the
EA, and make the final determination as to whether or not to
prepare an EIS. The ultimate decisions required by NEPA cannot
be delegated to the state. Thus, EPA is responsible for the
issuance of any EISs, FNSIs, CEs or other related NEPA documenta-
tion.
1.5 Preparation of Draft Environmental Documents by Delegated States
EPA's NEPA regulations (40 CFR 6.505) identify certain categories
of actions which will have negligible environmental impacts and,
therefore, are excluded from further NEPA review. Examples of
such projects include minor rehabilitation and repairs, and
replacement of existing equipment and structures. If a project
qualifies for issuance of a categorical exclusion (CE), the state
shall prepare a draft CE and submit it to EPA for issuance. If
the project does not qualify for a CE, the steps discussed below
shall be followed.
A complete summary of the environmental analyses conducted during
facility planning is called the Environmental Information Docu-
ment (EID) and must be included in the facilities plan. The
state will review the completed facilities plan with particular
attention to the adequacy of the EID and to the planned use of
the EID in the development and evaluation of alternatives and the
selection of the preferred alternative. The Facility Plan and
EID must be of sufficient scope to enable the state to prepare an
Environmental Assessment on the project. The state's preliminary
Environmental Assessment serves as the formal basis for EPA's
decision to issue a FNSI or to prepare an EIS. The state agency
reviewing the plan and the EID may reauire correction of inade-
quacies, and/or the submittal of any supplementary information
necessary for approving the facilities plan and for preparing the
draft Environmental Assessment.
1-3
-------
In preparing the draft Environmental Assessment, the state must
evaluate all potentially significant environmental impacts and
related factors (40 CFR Part 6.506(b)) prior to recommending an
EPA decision. The documentation provided by the state must be
sufficient to enable EPA to make a determination regarding
whether to issue a FNSI or a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS.
The recommended EA format, a sample CE and FNSI/EA, as well as
copies of facility plan and EID review procedures, are included
in the Appendices to this document.
1.6 Determination of Whether or Not to Prepare an EIS
EPA must prepare an EIS for a federally grant-assisted wastewater
facility project if it determines that the project may have a
significant effect on the human environment. Definition of the
term "significant" in this case is a common source of confusion
in conducting the NEPA review process. The following explanation
is from the EPA-Region V Environmental Review Manual for the
Construction Grants Program in Illinois.
"According to the CEQ regulations (40 CFR Part 1508.27), the term
"significant", as used in NEPA, requires consideration of both
"context" and "intensity". In determining the significance of an
action, the action must be analyzed in several contexts, includ-
ing those of society as a whole, the affected region, the af-
fected interests, and the immediate locality. Significance
varies with the setting of the proposed action, and both short-
and long-term effects are relevant. "Intensity" refers to the
severity of the impact. Factors that should be considered in
determining the severity of impacts are listed in 40 CFR Part
1508.27(b)." (EPA, Region V, p. 2-10)
In making this determination, EPA must consider the probable
significance of the project's impacts on subjects such as water
quality and quantity (supply), air quality, wetlands, flood-
plains, fish and wildlife habitat, endangered species, prime
agricultural lands, noise levels, energy, infrastructure, cul-
tural resources, population and land use (both existing and
projected) and other relevant characteristics of the project
area. Because EPA makes its FJS/FNSI determination based pri-
marily on the state's recommendation and the information provided
in the EA, it is important that the state carefully evaluate a
project's likely impacts on all of these subjects and document
this evaluation in the draft EA.
1-4
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURES UNDER 40 CFR PART 6
FIGURE 1
NO <»¦
STATE RECOMMENDS AND EPA DETERMINES
IF PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY
EXCLUDED FROM NEPA REVIEW
APPLICANT PREPARES AND
SUBMITS TO STATE EID
AND FACILITY PLAN
X
STATE REVIEWS FACILITY PLAN
MORE
INFORMATION
OR CHANGES
NECESSARY
=3
t> YES
ISSUE
CATEGORICAL
EXCLUSION
STATE PREPARES AND SUBMITS
TO EPA DRAFT EA
WITH FACILITY PLAN
EPA REVIEWS DRAFT EA
DETERMINES IF PROJECT
WILL HAVE A "SIGNIFICANT"
IMPACT ON THE HUMAN
ENVIRONMENT
MORE
INFORMATION
REQUIRED
V z
STATE CONDUCTS
FURTHER
INVESTIGATIONS
AS REQUIRED
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
I
EPA PREPARES EIS
(SEE FIGURE 2)
EPA ISSUES FNSI
WITH FINAL EA
I
AWARD GRANT/LOAN
30 DAY MINIMUM
COMMENT PERIOD
-------
NEPA PROCESS WHERE AN EIS IS NECESSARY
FIGURE 2
r
- YES
T
EPA REVIEW OF STATE'S DRAFT
EA DETERMINES THAT PROPOSED
ACTION NAY SIGNIFICANTLY
AFFECT HUMAN ENVIROMENT
NOTICE OF INTENT
I
SCOPING
T
PRELIMINARY LIST
OF ALTERNATIVES
CHARACTERIZATION
OF AFFECTED
ENVIRONMENT
Q_
ce
-c
Q_
DEVELOPMENT AND
EVALUATION OF
FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES
ASSESS IMPACTS OF
-------
POPULATION/
CONSTRAINTS
-------
CHAPTER 2 - POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
ANALYSES
2.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
The principal federal statutes regarding the use of population
projections and constraints analysis in wastewater facilities
planning are summarized in this section.
EPA - Construction Grants Regulations (40 CFR 35)
The Construction Grants Regulations (40 CFR Part 35) require
that a consistent set of population projections be developed
as part of 208 Water Quality Management (WQM) planning, be
adopted by each state and approved by EPA. Population
projections for facility plans prepared under the construc-
tion grants program must be consistent with and not exceed
the approved 208 population projections.
One of the most important factors in preparing an environ-
mental assessment (EA) is the estimate of an area's current
arid future population. An inflated population projection
can result in a project with excess reserve capacity and
oversized sewers. Both of these can contribute to popula-
tion growth with attendant secondary impacts. They can also
contribute to the escalation of project costs which can
place substantial financial burden on the community.
Applicants must comply with the requirements of the Cost-
Effectiveness Analysis Guidelines included in 40 CFR Part
35. These guidelines set forth a disaggregation process for
population projections that is designed to avoid provision
of excess reserve capacity and oversizing of sewer lines.
Projections used in facility plans must be based on disag-
gregations of state projection totals prepared by the Bureau
of Economic Analysis (BEA). In consultation with regional
planning agencies, the state divides its projection total
among designated 208 areas, standard metropolitan statistics
areas (SMSA's) not included in 208 areas, and counties and
other appropriate jurisdictions not included in 208 areas or
SMSA's. The designated 208 planning agency subdivides its
total. The state subdivides for other SMSA's. The state
may subdivide the total for the remaining area or leave it
to the applicant in those facility planning areas to produce
consistent and justifiable forecasts.
An analysis of projected growth patterns in relation to
environmentally sensitive lands - called an environmental
constraints analysis - must also be done as part of the
facility planning process. In addition, where appropriate,
the use of special grant conditions for sewer hookup restric-
tions to environmentally sensitive areas are encouraged.
2-1
-------
EPA - Construction Grants 1985
Section 5.5.1 of EPA's "CG-85" manual establishes further
guidance for using population projections in the facilities
planning process. They direct the applicant to use disaggre-
gated state population projections, if available. Projec-
tions should be made over a 20 year planning period for
wastewater facilities plans.
2.2 Environmental Review Procedures
Figure 3 shows environmental review procedures for population
projections and constraints analyses.
STEP 1: As early as possible in the facility planning process,
the state should advise the applicant on the population
projection requirements - the data to be used, proce-
dures for adjustment, and procedures for preparing an
environmental constraints analysis (ECA).
State developed population projections are to be used
as a basis for facility planning in determining the
size, location and staging of sewage treatment facili-
ties and in assessing secondary environmental impacts
related to growth. The official, updated state popula-
tion projections to be used for 201 facility planning
are those prepared according to the cost-effectiveness
analysis guidelines and certified under the 208 WQM
plan.
STEP 2: The state should advise the applicant on procedures for
apportioning population projections within facility
planning areas. Apportioning population projections
will be necessary in the following instances: (1) when
the boundaries of minor civil divisions, sewer service
areas and facility planning areas do not coincide, and
(2) when the applicant wishes to redistribute the
population projections within a facility planning area.
STEP 3: The state should advise the applicant of procedures for
preparing an environmental constraints analysis (ECA).
An ECA is a method of projecting population where
environmental constraints (i.e., floodplains and
wetlands, prime agricultural lands, steep slopes, etc.)
are a prime determinant in population distribution.
The ECA will identify existing vacant land within the
facility planning area considered constrained and
unconstrained for development. The ECA is used as a
tool for planning the location and capacity of sewage
treatment facilities.
Generally, an environmental constraints analysis
includes the following:
2-2
-------
PROCEDURES FOR POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND
CONSTRAINTS ANALYSES REVIEW
FIGURE 3
¦STFPS
-------
An environmental resource inventory - identifica-
tion and mapping of environmentally sensitive
areas located within the boundaries of the pro-
posed facilities planning area.
A comparison of existing zoning and land use to
identify inconsistencies within the planning and
service area. Inconsistencies, if any, will
include those areas previously identified as
undevelopable that are now zoned for development
and used as a basis for design of the proposed
sewer district.
A determination of the level of density and
anticipated growth on existing vacant developable
land using demographic and economic trends.
A determination of the level of constraint to
development (i.e., slight, moderate, severe).
STEP 4: The state should ensure that the maps prepared for the
ECA, which show the location of environmentally sensi-
tive areas, are used as a basis for developing detailed
block and lot maps of floodplains and wetlands where
sewer hook-up restrictions are appropriate.
STEP 5: Once the facility plan and Environmental Information
Document (EID) have been prepared and submitted to the
state, the state will be responsible for review of
these documents to ensure that the data presented
conforms to the requirements and procedures above.
STEP 6: When population issues have been adequately resolved,
the state should include a discussion of those issues,
and how they were resolved, in the draft Environmental
Assessment (EA). As of October 1, 1984, generally only
the capacity necessary to serve the existing population
at the time that the grant is awarded is eligible for
grant assistance (P.L. 97-117, Clean Water Act Amend-
ments of 1981).
2-3
-------
WATER RESOURCES
-------
CHAPTER 3 - WATER RESOURCES (SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER/SOLE
SOURCE AQUIFERS)
3.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the Clean Water
Act), as amended, was enacted to "...restore and maintain
the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
Nation's waters". The objectives of the Clean Water Act are
to be achieved in part by:
development of water quality standards and the
regulations necessary to implement and enforce
them (Section 303 of the Act - Water Quality
Management Planning);
formulation of state and areawide water quality
management plans, including comprehensive analysis
of the actions necessary to meet the water quality
standards (Section 208 of the Act - Water Quality
Management Planning);
issuance of permits for the discharge of all
pollutants to all point sources - industrial,
municipal, and other facilities — that release
pollutants from pipes, sewers, or other confined
outfalls (Section 402 of the Act - National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System);
provision for federal funds to assist in the
construction of municipal wastewater treatment
works (Section 201 of the Act - Construction
Grants Program).
The primary purpose of the Construction Grants Program is to
assist municipalities in meeting the enforceable require-
ments of the Act. Therefore, emphasis is placed upon the
abatement of existing water quality problems and compliance
with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit requirements. All projects under the Con-
struction Grants Program (Section 201 of the Clean Water
Act) should be evaluated in terms of their contribution to
achieving the water quality objectives of the Act.
The 1987 Amendments to the Act introduce considerable
changes to the Construction Grants Program. Specifically,
these amendments provide for a gradual phasing out of the
grants program through the implementation of State Revolving
Fund (SRF) loan programs.
3-1
-------
Safe Drinking Water Act
The purpose of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1974
(and as amended) is to assure that water supply systems
serving the public meet minimum national standards for
protection of public health. 40 CFR Parts 141 and 142,
establish National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regula-
tions and procedures for implementing these regulations
(respectively) pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act. The
regulations set maximum levels for various types of contami-
nants in drinking water and establish monitoring and analy-
tical requirements for these contaminants. 40 CFR Part 143,
sets maximum standards for Secondary Drinking Water Stand-
ards and 40 CFR Parts 144-147 establish regulations govern-
ing the Underground Injection Control Program. State's may
establish higher criteria levels for primary and secondary
drinking water standards as they deem appropriate.
Section 1424(e) of the SDWA authorizes the designation of a
sole source aquifer as "the sole or principal drinking water
source for that area and which, if contaminated, would
create a significant hazard to public health". Section
1424(e) mandates that no federal financial assistance can be
provided for any project which may contaminate a designated
sole source aquifer.
An environmental review of proposed wastewater facilities
projects pursuant to NEPA should ensure compliance with
Section 1424(e) requirements. Nevertheless, because of the
special treatment afforded to sole source aquifers by
section 1424(e), particular attention must be given in the
Facility Plan/EID, and in the EA, to addressing the poten-
tial impacts to groundwater from projects proposed for sole
source aquifer recharge areas.
3.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for water resources are
described below with specific reference to surface water and
groundwater/sole source aquifers. Step 1 is the same for both.
At Step 2, the procedures become specific to the type of re-
source.
STEP 1: The environmental information document (EID), prepared
as part of the facility planning process, must identify
and assess the proposed project's impacts to surface
and groundwater resources in the facilities planning
area, including aquifers and their recharge areas.
3-2
-------
Surface Water
The environmental review procedure for surface water is
diagrammed in Figure 4.
STEP A2: The state should ensure that primary impacts are
adequately addressed in the applicant's environmental
information document, such as impacts associated with
the construction and operation of the facilities. In
addition, while analyzing these impacts, consideration
should be given to what effect the changes in water
quality will have on fish and plant life and on water
supply and recreation activities. Water quality is
measured by certain parameters that indicate physical,
chemical and biological characteristics such as tur-
bidity, dissolved oxygen, and fecal coliform. Possible
primary impacts to water quality include: impacts from
construction activities, improvement in quality due to
additional treatment, and effects of disposing effluent
in receiving waters.
In order to develop a body of information on the
anticipated water quality improvements resulting from
the construction of new sewage facilities, it is
strongly suggested that specific water quality informa-
tion be included in the EA. Such information might
include the following:
the name of the stream segment(s) which are
likely to be affected (as identified in the
environmental status report section of the
State/EPA Agreement);
the water quality classification and desig-
nated use of the affected stream segment(s);
any water quality standards being violated in
that stream segment;
the potential for the abatement of any
existing water quality standards violations
due to construction of this project;
identification of any present water supply
systems drawing from the stream segment or
from infiltration galleries drawing from that
segment. This is usually applicable only to
intakes downstream of discharges except in
tidal water situations.
3-3
-------
STEPS
A2
y
PROCEDURES FOR WATER RESOURCES REVIEW
SURFACE WATER
FIGURE 4
YES
IDENTIFY IF THERE ARE
SURFACE WATER RESOURCES
IN THE PROJECT AREA
t> NO
IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES
o-
IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE
IMPACTS AND MITIGATE
ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH
/APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY
CRITERIA
& NON-COMPLIANCE
COMPLIANCE
o PROCEED
-------
The state should ensure that the applicant has identi-
fied and evaluated problems with and the potential for
erosion and sedimentation resulting from construction
on steep slopes and highly erodible soils. For pro-
jects where dewatering operations are expected during
construction, consideration must be given to minimizing
adverse effects from the discharge of silt-laden
waters.
For projects that involve land treatment or disposal,
the state reviewer should ensure that methods of waste
application are adequately evaluated to minimize soil
erosion and sediment runoff.
The state must also ensure that indirect impacts on
water quality caused by stormwater runoff resulting
from substantial increased development have been
adequately evaluated and minimized by the applicant.
Secondary impacts on water quality can be attributed
mainly to increased surface runoff, which includes
stormwater flows and sediment runoff. These waters
may contain significant amounts of pollutants that will
flow or seep into surface and groundwater.
New wastewater treatment facilities can affect water
quality by changing supply or demand for water. The
supply of usable water is influenced by surface runoff,
among other factors and can alter the quantity of water
available to recharge existing sources.
STEP A3: The state must ensure that the applicant has evaluated
the capability of each alternative to meet applicable
federal, state and local water quality criteria,
including the approved 208 Water Quality Management
Plan, and NPDES, SPDES or 7PDES discharge permits.
Groundwater/Sole Source Aquifers
The environmental review procedure for groundwater/sole
source aquifers is diagrammed in Figure 5. Figure 6 is
a map showing sole source aquifers in Region II.
STEP B?: Wherever effluent from proposed facilities will perco-
late or discharge into groundwater, the state must
ensure that the applicant has analyzed groundwater
impacts. The analysis must demonstrate that the
affected groundwater used as a public water supply will
comply with federal, state, and local environmental
laws, including the standards established under the
Safe Drinking Water Act (40 CFR Part 141 and 144 for
injection wells).
3-4
-------
STEPS
PROCEDURES FOR WATER RESOURCES REVIEW
AQUIFERS
FIGURE 5
YES «*¦
IDENTIFY IF THERE ARE
AQUIFERS IN THE PROJECT
AREA
-t> NO
B2
B3
B4
B5
IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES <*
IDENTIFY m EVALUATE IMPACTS
IMPLEMENT MONITORING PROGRAM
(FOR ON-SITE ONLY)
IDENTIFY IF THERE ARE
SOLE SOURCE AQUIFERS (SSA)
IN THE PROJECT AREA
YES
CONSULT EPA
¦ofNO
IDENTIFY FURTHER
INVESTIGATIONS REQUIRED
DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT
PROJECT MAY CONTAMINATE SSA
NO
YES
FURTHER INFORMATION
REQUIRED
J
L J
-e> PROCEED
-------
FIGURE 6
SOLE SOURCE AQUIFERS IN REGION II
(as of 11/87)
CHP
DESIGNATED
|LI | Long Island, NY
Ibv | Buried Valley, NJ
IRi 1 Rldqawood Area, NJ
|Rq 1 Rockaway River, NJ
|bq 1 Brooklyn/Oueens, NT
1SN | Schenectady/Niskayuna, NT
|CB | Clinton Street-Ballpark, NT
ICC | Cattarauqua Creek Basin, NY
\n Highlands, NJ
Ro)
BV?
NJ
PENDING
LcpJ New Jersey Coastal Plain
lCHpl Cortland-Home-Preble, NY
FnTI New Jersey State
-------
STEP B3: The state must ensure that the applicant has provided
for the development of a program to periodically test
water from existing potable wells in the project area
that plan to employ on-site treatment. If there are a
substantial number of existing on-site systems in the
project area, additional monitoring of aquifers may
also be necessary.
STEP B4: The state should consult with the applicant, as early
as possible in the planning process, to determine if
the proposed treatment facilities will be located in an
area designated as a Sole Source Aquifer (SSA). If the
proposed project is located in a designated SSA area,
the state must notify the applicant in writing that
specific groundwater issues (according to the nature of
the project) must be addressed. The state must consult
with EPA for confirmation of the SSA area characteris-
tics and location. EPA will identify areas within the
SSA area where specific wastewater treatment techno-
logies are unacceptable.
STEP B5: The state must inform the applicant of any essential
groundwater related parameters that must be investi-
gated as part of the planning process.
STEP B6: The state, in consultation with EPA, will evaluate all
the completed project planning documents for all
projects located in a SSA area to determine if the
proposed project will contaminate the SSA through a
recharge or stream flow source zone so as to create a
significant hazard to public health.
The state, in consultation with EPA, will make a deter-
minati on:
that more information is needed from the
applicant to make a determination; or,
that the proposed project may contaminate the
SSA so as to create a significant hazard to
public health. In this case, acceptable
alternatives must be sought. If there are no
acceptable alternatives, no funding should be
provided for the project; or
that the proposed project will not contami-
nate the SSA and is cleared from further
review under Section 1424(e) of the SDWA.
This determination must be incorporated into
any FNSI/EA or EIS prepared for the project.
3-5
-------
WETLANDS
-------
CHAPTER 4 - WETLANDS
Wetlands are defined by Executive Order 11990 (1977) on Protection of
Wetlands, Section 7(c) as "those areas that are innundated by surface
or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support and under
normal circumstances do or would support a prevalence of vegetative or
aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil
conditions for growth and reproduction". Wetlands include swamps,
marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet
meadows, river overflows, mud flats, natural ponds, and mangrove
swamps.
4.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
National policy considers wetlands to be unique and vital natural
resources of critical importance; the unnecessary destruction or
alteration of these resources should be discouraged. The federal
government has promulgated laws, executive orders, regulations
and guidelines to minimize destruction of or adverse impacts to
the nation's wetlands*. Those statutes which are relevant to
wetlands protection and to the intent of this manual are summar-
ized as follows:
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 (FWCA) (16 USC
661]
The FWCA requires federal agencies to give wildlife conser-
vation equal consideration with other features during
planning and decision-making processes that may impact water
bodies (including wetlands). Under the Act, the agency must
consult with the appropriate state and federal wildlife
agencies if a supported project will impact a water body to
determine appropriate mitigative measures.
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) (16 USC 1451)
The CZMA encourages states to develop comprehensive manage-
ment programs that balance the wise use and protection of
coastal areas. The Act includes tidal wetlands as one type
of critical area to be state managed through the program. A
determination of consistency with the state's coastal zone
management plan (if such a plan has been approved) must be
~
NOTE: Aspects of reviewing wetland impacts are related to review
activities associated with other resources (i.e., coastal
zones and water bodies). Therefore, although the subject of
this chapter is wetlands, much of the material applies to
these resources as well.
4-1
-------
obtained from the appropriate state agency before a feder-
ally-funded action can be conducted in the coastal zone.
Requirements of the CZMA are discussed further in Chapter 11
of this Manual.
River and Harbor Act of 1899 (R&HA) - Section 10
Section 10 of the R&HA prohibits the unauthorized alteration
or obstruction of any navigable waters of the United States.
This section requires that a permit be obtained from the
Corps of Engineers (COE) prior to constructing any structure
in or over any navigable waters, excavating from or deposit-
ing materials in such waters, or any other work affecting
the course, location, condition, or capacity of such waters.
The party intending to initiate any of the above actions is
responsible for complying with Section 10 of the R&HA.
Clean Water Act (CMA) - Section 404 (33 USC 466)
Section 404 of the CWA established a national program to
control the discharge of dredged or fill materials into
waters of the United States. "Waters of the United States"
include all tributaries of navigable waters up to their
headwaters and landward to their ordinary high water mark,
and all tidal waters up to the high tide line, thus includ-
ing wetlands. The section established a permit program that
is administered by the COE for the placement of dredged and
fill material into these waters. Prior to award of a
permit, it must be demonstrated that there is clear need to
place the dredged/fill material in the water resource and
that there are no practicable alternatives available. As
with Section 10 permits, the party intending to initiate the
action is responsible for compliance with Section 404 of the
CWA.
EPA - Administrator's Statement Number 4 - February 23, 1973
This decision statement outlines the values of wetlands and
states that it is the Agency's policy to give special
attention to any proposal that may damage wetlands and to
protect wetlands to the maximum extent practicable from
adverse dredging and filling practices and non-point source
pollution. Regarding the 201 program, it specifically
states, "...it shall be the policy of this Agency not to
grant federal funds for the construction of municipal
wastewater treatment facilities or other waste treatment
associated appurtenances which may interfere with the
existing wetland ecosystem except where no other alternative
of lesser environmental damage is found to be feasible."
4-2
-------
Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands - May 24, 1977
Executive Order 11990 directs federal agencies to take
actions to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of
wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and bene-
ficial values of wetlands in carrying out the agencies'
responsibilities. In addition, the executive order requires
that direct or indirect support of new construction in
wetlands be avoided wherever there are practicable alterna-
tives.
EPA - Statement of Procedures on Floodplain Management and
Wetlands Protection - January 5, 1979
Based primarily on executive orders (11988 and 11990), these
procedures state EPA's policy of avoiding impacts to wet-
lands in all EPA programs. These procedures require that
floodplain/wetland assessments be prepared for agency
actions that will impact these features. Floodplain/wetland
assessments should be included in environmental assessments
and/or environmental impact statements in order to allow
proper public review.
4.2 Environmental Review Procedures
Figure 7 demonstrates the process to be followed during environ-
mental review procedures for wetland protection.
STEP 1: During the scoping of wastewater facilities projects,
the applicant should identify any wetlands in the
project area or potentially affected by the proposed
action.
STEP 2: If any such wetlands exist, they must be delineated in
the EID. If no such wetlands exist, the EID should so
state, and the facilities planning process may proceed
without further consideration of the procedures set
forth below.
There are several sources available to ensure that
wetlands are accurately identified and delineated. For
federal projects, the recommended source is the Na-
tional Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps developed by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). These maps are
generally transparent overlays to the U.S. Geologic
Survey's 7.5 minute quad sheets prepared by interpret-
ing aerial photographs. Figure 8 is an example of a
NWI map and Figure 9 is a cross-sectional diagram of a
wetland.
Additional sources for delineating wetlands include:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(COE) reports, Soil Surveys
prepared by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), state
wetland maps, and local sources.
4-3
-------
PROCEDURES FOR WETLAND REVIEW
FIGURE 7
STEPS
1
YES o
DETERMINE IF PROPOSED ACTION
S IN OR WOULD AFFECT WETLANDS
EARLY PUBLIC NOTICE AND REVIEW
X
DELINEATE WETLANDS
IN OR
AFFECTING
WETLANDS
NOT IN OR
AFFECTING
WETLANDS
-o NO
IDENTIFY I EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES TO
LOCATING IN OR AFFECTING WETLANDS
o NO ACTION
IDENTIFY IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ACTION
AND CONDUCT WETLANDS ASSESSMENT
DEVELOP MITIGATION PLAN
PUBLIC NOTICE AND REVIEW
p d n r rrn
r K u L ttu
-------
FIGURE 8
SAMPLE WETLAND DELINEATION (NWI MAP)
SOURCE: US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
-------
PALUSTRINE
UPLAND
PALUSTRINE
Seepage Zone
WETLANDS CROSS-SECTION
a TEMPORARILY FLOODED
b SEASONALLY FLOODED
c SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED
d INTERMITTENTLY EXPOSED
e PERMANENTLY FLOODED
f SATURATED
HIGH WATER
AVERAGE WATER
LOW WATER
SOURCE: FWS. 1979. CLASSIFICATION OF WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITAT OF THE US
FIGURE 9
-------
Regardless of the source chosen for wetland delinea-
tion, there will always be the possibility of errors in
the mapped delineations. Therefore, the extent of
wetlands should be verified through field investiga-
tions. The most widely accepted wetland identification
and delineation method is probably the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers' (COE) three parameter approach. More
information on this approach may be obtained from the
COE (see Appendix D).
STEP 3: Primary Impacts
If it has been determined the project is in or may
affect wetlands, the applicant must evaluate the
project's impacts, if any, to these resources. The
appropriate District Office of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers should be requested to determine whether the
dredge/fill permitting requirements of section 404 of
the CWA are applicable to the proposed project. The
best way to avoid adverse impacts to wetlands is to
avoid these areas when selecting facility locations.
If one or more of the alternatives will be located in a
wetland, those alternatives may not be selected unless
a determination is made that no practicable alternative
exists outside the wetlands.
If there are no practicable alternatives that avoid
impacts to wetlands, the impacts and any mitigating
measures must be analyzed in detail. There are a
variety of measures to mitigate unavoidable adverse
wetland impacts. Common measures are listed in Appen-
dix G.
In accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, the appropriate state and federal wildlife agen-
cies (see Contacts in Appendix D) must be consulted if
wetlands will be impacted by a wastewater facilities
project. These agencies will be helpful in developing
out-of-wetland alternatives or recommending proper
mitigation. EPA may also be consulted for review and
technical input.
If the applicant has not already done so, the state
environmental reviewer should initiate the coordination
with the appropriate agencies. Results of the coordi-
nation, including all mitigation measures, must be
documented in writing.
It should be noted that mitigative measures, particu-
larly wetland restoration, can be very costly. This
should be kept in mind when evaluating the costs of
alternatives.
4-4
-------
If the project is in or may affect wetlands, a wetlands
assessment must be conducted and incorporated into the
EA. The reviewer should consult with EPA in cases that
require a wetlands assessment. Wetlands assessments
consist of a description of the proposed action, a
discussion of its effect on the wetlands, a description
of the alternatives considered and their effects on the
wetlands, and measures to minimize potential harm to
the wetland if there is no practicable alternative to
locating in or affecting these resources. A wetlands
assessment may be combined with a floodplain assessment
for the same action, if appropriate. The wetlands
assessment must be incorporated into the EA.
Secondary Impacts
If a facilities planning area contains wetlands, the
proposed project has the potential for secondary
impacts to these areas. An environmental constraints
analysis which eliminates future populations and,
therefore, future flows from wetlands is the initial
step towards minimizing secondary wetland impacts. In
addition to downsizing facilities to eliminate capacity
for wetland development, realigning of interceptor
routes and restricting sewer hookups are additional
measures which can be undertaken to mitigate adverse
secondary impacts to wetlands.
Using the wetland maps prepared for the environmental
constraints analysis or the existing conditions por-
tions of the facilities plan, the state will determine
the need for detailed mapping (i.e., block and lot maps
for certain areas). Detailed wetlands mapping will be
required when special grant conditions are necessary to
restrict sewer hookups from new development in wetlands
(i.e., significant areas of wetlands subject to in-
creased development pressure, unprotected by other
federally-mandated programs [e.g., Coastal Zone Manage-
ment]). If, however, detailed mapping is determined to
be unnecessary, the wetland areas would still be
protected by measures mentioned above and state pro-
grams (e.g., state wetland protection programs, CZM,
sewer extension approvals).
Following the review and approval of the detailed maps
by the state and EPA, the applicant will hold a public
hearing on this material. This material will then
constitute an amendment to the project's facilities
plan. (Or, alternatively, if developed concurrently
with the facility plan, the mapping is made part of the
plan and addressed at the public hearing on the facili-
ty plan.)
4-5
-------
If detailed maps are prepared and special grant condi-
tions applied, waivers of the hookup restriction may be
granted on a case-by-case basis. Waiver approvals
require written approval from the EPA Regional Adminis-
trator. However, the waiver request will be evaluated
initially by the delegated state's environmental
reviewers, who will make recommendations to EPA regard-
ing whether the waiver request should be granted. EPA
will review the merits of the waiver request together
with the state's recommendation and decide whether to
grant the waiver.
4-6
-------
FLOODPLAINS
-------
CHAPTER 5 - FLOODPLAINS
Floodplains are defined by Executive Order 11988 (1977) on Floodplain
Management, Section 6(c) as "lowland and relatively flat areas adjoin-
ing inland and coastal waters including floodprone areas of offshore
islands ..." These resources are generally categorized as either
100-year floodplains (areas subject to a 1.0% chance of flooding in
any given year), or 500-year floodplains (areas subject to a 0.2%
chance of flooding in any given year). Generally, the 100 year
floodplain is considered for wastewater facility projects, but a
project's effect on the 500 year floodplain must also be considered if
it is determined by the Water Resources Council Guidelines that the
project is a "critical action".
5.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
National policy recognizes the need to minimize adverse economic
impacts to the public caused by flooding. The federal government
has promulgated laws, executive orders, regulations and guide-
lines to reduce these impacts. Those statutes which are relevant
to floodplain management and to the intent of this Manual are
summarized as follows:
National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (NFIA) (42 USC 4001)
The NFIA authorized the National Flood Insurance Program.
This is a federally subsidized program to protect property
owners who previously had not been able to obtain coverage
through the private insurance industry. In return for the
federal subsidy, states and local governments must adopt
minimum management strategies to avoid future flood damage
within their floodplain areas.
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (FDPA) (4? USC 4401)
The NFIA was amended in 1973 by the FDPA which expanded the
available limits of flood insurance coverage and imposed
additional requirements on property owners and communities.
The FDPA required the purchase of flood insurance as a
condition of receiving any federal assistance for projects
in special flood hazard areas located within any community
in which the sale of flood insurance has been authorized
under the program. In other words, no federal financial
assistance can be approved if the community is not partici-
pating in the national flood insurance program.
Executive Order 11988 - Floodplain Management - May 24, 1982
Executive Order 11988 directs agency heads to avoid long-
and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy
and modification of floodplains. In addition, the executive
5-1
-------
order requires the avoidance of direct and indirect support
of floodplain development wherever there are practicable
alternatives. Agencies responsible for providing federal
assistance for construction and improvements and for con-
ducting programs affecting land use should take actions:
To reduce risk of flood loss,
To minimize the impacts of floods on human safety,
health, and welfare, and
To preserve the natural and beneficial values served by
floodplains.
Water Resources Council (WRC) - Floodplain Management
Guidelines - February 10, 1978
In the February 10, 1978, Federal Register, the WRC issued
Floodplain Management Guidelines in accordance with its
mandate in Executive Order 11988. These guidelines were
issued to aid other federal agencies in amending their
regulations and procedures to comply with the Order. The
guidelines outline an eight step decision-making process
required by section 2(a) of the Order. This process relies
heavily on public review of the proposed action and all
alternatives.
Under the guidelines, a critical action is any activity for
which even a slight chance of flooding would be too great.
In the case of critical actions, the area requiring protec-
tion and/or mitigation is expanded from the 100-year to the
500-year floodplain. The determination of whether or not a
project qualifies as a "critical action" is made on a case
by case basis. For example, storage of toxic chemicals or
hazardous sludges may be considered critical actions.
EPA - Statement of Procedures on Floodplain Management and
Wetlands Protection - January 5, 1979
See discussion under same title in Chapter 4.
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) (16 USC 1451)
See discussion under same title in Chapter 4 and further
discussion in Chapter 11.
5.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for floodplains are described
below and are diagrammed in Figure 10.
5-2
-------
PROCEDURES FOR FLOODPLA1N REVIEW
FIGURE 10
STEPS
1
YES <*
DETERMINE IF PROPOSED ACTION
IS IN THE FLOODPLAIN *
o NO
EARLY PUBLIE REVIEW
2 DELINEATE FLOODPLAIN
IDENTIFY I EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES TO
LOCATING IN THE FLOODPLAIN
I
IN THE
FLOODPLAIN
NOT IN THE
FLOODPLAIN
«> NO ACTION
IDENTIFY IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ACTION
AND CONDUCT FLOODPLAIN ASSESSMENT
3 MINIMIZE. RESTORE AND PRESERVE
DOES THE ACTION HAVE
YESH IMPACTS ON THE
FLOODPLAIN
I
NO
REEVALUATE ALTERNATIVES
I
«> NO ACTION
IN THE
FLOODPLAIN
LIMIT ACTION - RETURN TO STEP 3
FINDINGS AND PUBLIC EXPLANATION
PROCEED
* FOR CRITICAL ACTIONS "FLOODPLAIN" IS DEFINED AS THE 500 YEAR FLOODPLAIN
ADAPTED FROM FEDERAL REGISTER; VOL. 43. NO. 2 9-FRI DAY. FEBRUARY 10. 1978
-------
STEP 1: During the development of facilities plans, the appli-
cant should identify any floodplain in the project
area, or potentially affected by the proposed action.
For areas that are predominantly privately owned, the
Tederal Insurance Administration of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has maps that
identify and delineate floodplains. The Flood Insur-
ance Rate Map shows the boundaries and elevations of
the 100 and 500 year floodplains. Figure 11 is a
sample flood insurance rate map. "Zone A" represents
the 100 year flood zone, and "Zone B" represents the
500 year flood zone. Figure 12 is a cross-sectional
diagram of a floodplain. Flood insurance rate maps can
be obtained from FEMA by calling 1-800-638-6620. For
areas which are predominantly state or federally owned,
the controlling federal or state agency should be
consulted for information.
Additional information for identifying and delineating
floodplains may be available from:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
USDA Soil Conservation Service,
State environmental departments,
Local municipalities, or
Other agencies listed in WRC's Floodplain Manage-
ment Guidelines.
STEP 2: If any such floodplains are identified, the EID must
delineate the portions of the project area that are
subject to a 100-year flood. If no such floodplains
exist, the EID should so state, and the facility
planning process may proceed without further considera-
tion of the procedures set forth below.
STEP 3: Primary Impacts
If a proposed project is located in or may affect a
floodplain, the EID must evaluate the direct impacts of
the various alternatives, if any, on these resources.
If no practicable alternatives exist, the applicant
should be required to incorporate measures into the
project so as to minimize or avoid adverse effects to
the floodplain.
5-3
-------
-------
100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
LINE A-B IS THE FLOOD ELEVATION BEFORE ENCROACHMENT
UNE C-D IS THEFLOOO ELEVATION AFTER ENCROACHMENT
~ SURCHARGE NOT TO EXCEED I.OFOOT(FEMA REQUIREMENT) OR LESSER AMOUNT IF SPECIFIED BY STATE.
FLOODPLAIN CROSS-SECTION
FIGURE 12
SOURCE: FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDIES
-------
This includes acting to restore and preserve the
natural and beneficial values of floodplains. The
benefits of preserving floodplains in their natural or
relatively undisturbed state include not only reduction
of flood hazards, but maintenance of water quality
standards, replenishment of ground water, soil conser-
vation, the fostering of fish, wildlife and plant re-
sources, and the provision of recreational areas.
Some methods for minimizing potential primary impacts
to floodplains are presented in Appendix G.
A floodplain assessment may be combined with a wetlands
assessment for the same action, if appropriate, and
incorporated into the draft environmental assessment.
See the discussion at the end of Step 3: Primary
Impacts in Chapter 4.
Secondary Impacts
If a facilities planning area contains floodplains, the
proposed project has the potential for secondary
impacts to these areas. An environmental constraints
analysis which eliminates future populations and,
therefore, future flows from floodplains is the initial
step towards minimizing secondary floodplain impacts.
Eliminating environmentally sensitive areas from the
facility's sewer service area, downsizing facilities to
eliminate capacity for floodplain development, and
realigning interceptor routes are additional measures
to mitigate adverse secondary impacts to floodplain
areas.
Using the floodplain maps prepared for the environmen-
tal constraints analysis, the state will determine the
need for the use of grant conditions restricting sewer
hookups. Detailed mapping (i.e., block and lot maps)
will be required when special grant conditions are
likely to be used to restrict sewer hookups. If,
however, the community is participating in the REGULAR
PHASE of the federal flood insurance program, detailed
mapping is unnecessary and sewer hookup restrictions
are not required, because the flood insurance program
requires municipalities to implement measures to
preserve and protect floodplain values. The floodplain
areas would be protected through state programs (e.g.,
sewer extension approvals), through the program re-
quirements of the federal flood insurance program, and
by local zoning and building codes enforcement.
If detailed maps are prepared and special grant condi-
tions are applied, waivers can be granted on a case-
by-case basis in the same manner as discussed in the
section on wetlands protection.
5-4
-------
AIR QUALITY
-------
CHAPTER 6 - AIR QUALITY
6.1 Legis1ative/Regulatory Framework
Clean Air Act
The Clean Air Act of 1977 directs EPA to set ambient air
quality standards and to establish limitations for new
pollutant sources. (The Act has not been substantively
amended since 1977.) Each state has been given the respon-
sibility of developing strategies for attaining ambient air
quality standards within its own geographic area. A state's
total air quality control strategy is known as the State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Sections of the Act which affect
construction grants projects are discussed below.
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that each
state attain national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
for criteria pollutants within three years of EPA approval
of the state's State Implementation Plan (SIP). Some
states, ur.able to attain the ozone and/or carbon monoxide
standards in the original time frame established by Section
110 were granted extensions in 1982. These states have
until the end of 1987 to achieve the NAAQS standards for
ozone and carbon monoxide*. States failing to submit,
implement, or respond adequately to EPA corrections to their
plans may face sanctions which include limitations on
federal sewage treatment funds (CAA, Section 316).
There are six criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide, ozone
(precursors are hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides), sulfur
oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates and lead. Entire
States or areas (as described by EPA in 40 CFR 51.1) can be
classified as either "attainment" or non-attainment" areas
for each individual criteria pollutant. Thus, a state or
area could be in attainment for some criteria pollutants and
in non-attainment for others. The SIP for each state must
include specific measures for correcting non-attainment
areas.
Section 176(c) states that federal agencies cannot approve
or fund projects which are not in conformance with the SIP.
Section 316 authorizes the Administrator of EPA to condi-
tion, restrict, or withhold grants for wastewater treatment,
facilities:
If the facilities involve an incinerator or an identi-
fiable source of volatilization of organic compounds
that cannot meet the new source performance standards
(NSPS) or the national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutant sources (NESHAPS);
*N0TE: EPA is currently considering actions that may extend this
deadline. More information on this will be provided to the
States as it becomes available.
6-1
-------
If the proposed new treatment capacity will lead,
directly or indirectly, to an increase in emissions in
excess of those provided for in the SIP or will other-
wise not conform to the SIP;
Where the project is in a nonattainment area or an area
subject to prevention of significant deterioration and
the state is not carrying out or does not have an
approved SIP which provides for the project's antici-
pated emissions; or
If the increased emissions associated with the new
capacity will interfere with or be inconsistent with
the SIP of any of the surrounding states.
EPA - Procedures and Requirements Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act for the Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Construction Grants Program (40 CFR 6)
Section 6.303 of EPA1s NEPA regulations sets forth procedures for
incorporating the requirement for conformance with the SIPs under
Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. These procedures include:
Assessing the extent of the direct or indirect in-
creases in emissions and their subsequent effect on air
quality;
Consulting with state and local agencies to determine
whether or not the proposed action conforms with the
SIP; and
Assuring in the FNSI/EA or draft EIS that the proposed
action conforms with the SIP.
EPA - Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans (40 CFR 51)
Section 51.18 of these regulations establishes requirements
concerning emissions from new or modified facilities, including
wastewater facilities. The regulations require that SIPs include
legally enforceable procedures which allow the state or a local
agency to determine whether a new or modified facility will
either directly or indirectly cause a violation of the control
strategy or interfere with the maintenance of a national stand-
ard. If the responsible state or local agency finds that the
facility will result in such a violation or interference, it will
prevent the construction or modification of the facility.
Guidelines for implementing these procedures are also presented
in Section 51.18.
-------
EPA - Policy and Procedures Memorandum on Section 316 Limitations
in the Construction Grants Program (45 FR 53382)
On August 11, 1980, EPA issued a policy and procedures memorandum
to implement the construction grant limitations in section 316 of
the Clean Air Act. The purpose of this policy is to ensure that
wastewater construction grants projects do not contribute to air
quality deterioration and to invoke sanctions on states which
have not fully complied with SIP adoption requirements. The 316
policy specifies the conditions under which grants must be
withheld, discusses extenuating circumstances where exceptions
are allowed, and discusses how SIPs can be revised or mitigation
programs can be adopted to allow certain projects to proceed.
The basic policy elements include:
assuring compliance of new sewage treatment works with
the NSPS and the NESHAPS,
withholding construction grants in areas where states
have not made good faith efforts to submit or carry out
an SIP revision,
reconciling population projections used for air and
water quality planning to ensure that SIPs provide an
accurate accounting of the increased indirect emissions
associated with new sewage treatment capacity,
withholding portions of construction grants for major
growth-related projects in attainment areas:
where the emissions associated with the project
will contribute to the violation of any national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS),
where the SIP and water quality planning popula-
tion projections are inconsistent by more than 5
percent, and
consulting with adjacent states to prevent the in-
creased emissions associated with new sewage treatment
capacity from interfering or being inconsistent with
any other SIP.
NOTE: The Section 316 Policy is currently being revised. On
September 11, 1987, EPA issued its "Final Draft Proposal to
Revise the Section 316 Policy." Under the new policy,
explicit exceptions for projects would be eliminated.
6.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for air quality are described
below and diagrammed in Figure 13.
6-3
-------
PROCEDURES FOR AIR QUALITY REVIEW
FIGURE 13
STFPS
1
4
-------
STEP 1: The state should explain the requirements for incorpor-
ating control technology for direct emissions, and for
quantifying and mitigating indirect emissions, to the
applicant and its consultant during the initial stages
of the facility planning process.
STEP 2: During evaluation of the alternatives, the applicant
must develop the analyses required by 40 CFR 6.303 and
include these in the environmental information docu-
ment. The applicant must also ensure that the project
complies with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.18. The
environmental information document should recognize
that Section 316 of the CAA pertains to both direct and
indirect emission sources at treatment facilities.
Emissions that should be considered under the New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) or the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Sources
(NESHAPS) are not limited to incinerators. Emissions
from wastewater treatment facilities may come from a
number of sources, primarily as the result of volatili-
zation of organic compounds in the sewage stream.
Volatilization may occur along the sewer lines, and at
the treatment facility in aeration basins (in activated
sludge systems), flumes, grit chambers, sumps, equaliza-
tion basins, open storage tanks, pH adjustment sta-
tions, nutrient addition stations, clarifiers, oxida-
tion basins, wastewater transfer lines, and pipes or
ditches.
Direct impacts due to vehicle emissions should be
evaluated if state air quality permits are necessary,
or if the increase in vehicle traffic for project con-
struction or operation is greater than 10 percent.
Population projections for the facility planning
analysis must meet the provisions of Section 5.5.1 of
Construction Grants 1985 (CG-85). This document
requires use of current state projections used for air
quality planning.
STEP 3: The state reviewer should critically evaluate the
information developed by the project applicant to
determine whether the project has the potential for
adverse air quality impacts. If the project appears to
have potentially significant adverse air quality
impacts, the state should consult with the state agency
with primary responsibility for the SIP, with the
non-attainment enforcement agency designated under
Section 174 of the Act, and where appropriate, with the
metropolitan planning organization, to find out whether
the project complies with the SIP. If no adverse
impacts are anticipated, the state can assume conform-
ance without consultation.
6-4
-------
In either case, the preliminary EA should contain a
statement assuring conformance based on the determin-
ations contained in 40 CFR 6.303(d). Documentation of
consultation, where it was carried out, should be
submitted to EPA by the state along with the prelim-
inary EA.
Where an assurance of conformance cannot be made, the
state will recommend additional planning to assure
conformance or recommend that EPA determine that an EIS
is necessary under the criteria contained in 40 CFR
Part 6.
STEP 4: After receiving and reviewing the information contained
in the State's preliminary EA, EPA will, in the case of
a conforming project, issue a FNSI. Where no consulta-
tion was undertaken, the review period of the FNSI will
allow the state agency with primary responsibility for
the SIP an opportunity to concur or object to the
assurance of conformance in the EA.
In cases where the air quality impacts associated with
the proposed sewage treatment facilities are determined
to be minor, short-term construction-related impacts,
the state reviewer must ensure that the environmental
assessment and construction specifications include
mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate these
impacts. Typical construction-related impacts include
increased exhaust emissions generated by truck and
automobile traffic to and from the site, as well as
increased dust, particulate and diesel emissions.
The state reviewer must ascertain and document, in the
EA, the NAAQS attainment status of the project area.
The project area will fall into one of the following
categories for each criteria pollutant:
(1) attainment in a designated AQMA - area where
standards are presently met,
(2) non-attainment in a designated AQMA - area where
standards for a particular criteria pollutant are
presently exceeded in an area where future growth
and emissions may jeopardize air quality stand-
ards, and
(3) non-attainment in a non-designated AQMA - area
where standards are presently exceeded for a
particular criteria pollutant and not located in
an AQMA.
In each case, the EA must include a statement on the
NAAQS attainment status of the project area, as appli-
cable (see examples in Appendix B5).
6-5
-------
ENDANGERED
SPECIES
-------
CHAPTER 7 - ENDANGERED SPECIES
The Endangered Species Act of 1973, Section 3(6) defines endangered
species as "any (plant or animal) species which is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range "
Threatened species, which are also covered by this Act, are defined in
Section 3(20) as "any species which is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range".
7.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531)
The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, provides a
means whereby various species of fish, wildlife and plants
which are threatened with extinction may be conserved.
The Act requires the Secretary of the Interior to research
the status of various species and designate a species as
endangered or threatened where such designation is war-
ranted. The designated species list also identifies that
portion of the range of a species where it is endangered or
threatened and any critical habitat within such range. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has the jurisdiction
over and the responsibility for terrestrial and freshwater
species on the list, while the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) has jurisdiction and responsibility for the
marine species.
Section 7(a) of the Act requires all federal agencies, such
as the Environmental Protection Agency, to ensure that
actions they authorize, fund or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threat-
ened species or adversely modify or destroy the critical
habitats of such species. Actions which might jeopardize
listed species have been interpreted to include direct and
indirect effects, together with the cumulative effects of
other actions which are interrelated or interdependent with
the proposed action.
If listed species or their habitat are to be affected by a
proposed project, consultation between the agency acting on
the project and the appropriate wildlife agency (FWS and/or
NMFS) must be undertaken. Consultation is required to
determine whether or not the project is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species or result in the destruction or adverse modification
of a critical habitat. Secticn 7 of the amended Act re-
quires that specific procedures be followed in order to
determine this. Section 7 consultation consists of a
request for information and, if necessary, a biological
assessment, and a biological opinion from the FWS or the
NMFS.
7-1
-------
In addition to the federal endangered species program, many
states have endangered species programs of their own and
maintain lists of those species endangered or threatened
within the state.
7.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for endangered species are
described below and diagramed in Figure 14.
STEP 1: Request for Information (Informal Consultation)
As early as possible in the facility planning process,
the applicant (or state reviewer) should prepare a
written request to the regional director(s) of the FWS
and the NMFS requesting a determination of whether
there are endangered or threatened species present in
the study area which are listed or proposed to be
listed, or have critical habitats within the study
area. A written request for information initiates
informal consultation (see sample letter in Appendix
E.) The location and type of project and a map of the
planning area for each project should be included with
the letters to the FWS and NMFS. A current list of
federal endangered and threatened species and their
critical habitat (if any) by state is presented in
Appendix E.
The FWS and NMFS are required to respond within 30 days
of the receipt of such a request. If more than 30 days
are needed to reply, the F&WS and NMFS are expected to
notify the regulator before the 30 day time period has
expired.
If the FWS and NMFS determine that no listed or pro-
posed species are present in the study area, no further
consultation with these agencies is required. If
subsequent to this determination, new information on
the presence of an endangered species or critical
habitat within the study area is presented, consulta-
tion with the FWS and NMFS must be reinitiated.
STEP 2: The applicant/state must also identify any state
endangered species within the project area and follow
appropriate state requirements. In any case, if a
species on the state list is within the study area, an
assessment of the potential impacts of the project on
the species must be performed, and the EID/EA must
include a discussion of the necessary measures to
protect them.
7-2
-------
PROCEDURES FOR ENDANGERED SPECIES REVIEW
FIGURE 14
STEPS
YES
YES
BIOLOGICAL
ASSESSMENT (BA)
PROJECT MAY AFFECT
LISTED SPECIES
I
INITIATE SECTION 7
FORMAL CONSULTATION
W/ FWS I NMFS (BO)
X
I.
PROJECT IS LIKELY
TO ADVERSELY
AFFECT SPECIES
APPLY FOR EXEMPTION
FROM SECRETARY OF
INTERIOR
r
REQUEST DETERMINATION FROM FWS I
NMFS OF WHETHER THERE ARE FEDERAL
ENDANGERED SPECIES IN THE STUDY AREA
o NO
DETERMINE WHETHER THERE ARE
STATE ENDANGEREO SPECIES IN
THE PROJECT AREA
NO
ASSESS PROJECT IMPACTS ON THESE
SPECIES AND IDENTIFY NECESSARY
MEASURES TO PROTECT THEM
PROJECT MAY AFFECT
PROPOSED SPECIES
SUPPLY FWS & NMFS
WITH BA AND
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT WILL NOT
AFFECT SPECIES
SUPPLY FWS I NMFS
WITH BA AND
DETERMINATION
2 L
INSUFFICIENT
INFORMATION TO
RENDER A DECISION
1
PROJECT IS NOT
LIKELY TO
AFFECT SPECIES
ELIMINATE PROPOSED ACTION
FROM CONSIDERATION AND
REEVALUATE ALTERNATIVES
O EXEMPTION NOT GRANTED
U
EXEMPTION GRANTED
IMPLEMENT SPECIFIED MITIGATION
AND REPORT COMPLIANCE TO CEQ
t> PROCEED O
-------
STEP 3: A determination that an endangered species or critical
habitat (federal) is present and may be impacted will
necessitate preparation of a biological assessment.
The biological assessment (BA) must be submitted by
EPA, to the FWS or NMFS as appropriate.
The intent of the BA is to examine any possible impacts
of a proposed action upon the affected species or
critical habitats in the project area. The BA should
include:
An interview of wildlife experts;
A review of literature and field data to determine
likely locations of critical habitat;
An on-site inspection of the total area affected
to determine the presence or absence of affected
species and/or critical habitat;
An analysis of the likely effects of the proposed
project on the species in terms of individuals
(short-term impacts) and populations (long-term
impact);
An analysis of alternative actions to protect
endangered species; and
A description of the study methodology.
Prior to the implementation of any of the tasks out-
lined above, the specific scope of the BA must be
approved by the appropriate FWS or NMFS director.
The BA must be completed within 180 days after the date
on which initiated unless an extension is granted. The
project cannot be approved until the BA and section 7
consultation process are completed. Further guidance
on preparing a BA is included in Appendix E.
STEP 4: Based upon the conclusions of the BA, EPA in consulta-
tion with the FWS or NMFS must determine which of the
following courses of action to pursue:
a. If EPA determines the project will not affect any
listed or proposed species, EPA will supply the
appropriate area manager or regional director of
the FWS or NMFS with that determination and the
completed BA. Unless FWS and NMFS disagree with
EPA's determination of no effect, EPA's endangered
species responsibilities under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act have been met.
7-3
-------
b. No formal section 7 endangered species consulta-
tion is required on proposed species. If, how-
ever, EPA anticipates any potential adverse impact
on a proposed species, EPA will supply a copy of
the BA and project proposal to FWS and/or NMFS and
confer with them on an informal basis. If re-
quested by EPA and deemed appropriate by FWS, a
formal consultation may be conducted for proposed
species.
c. Formal Consultation - If EPA anticipates the
project may affect a 1 isted species, EPA must
request initiation of formal section 7 endangered
species consultation with the regional directors
of the FWS and/or NMFS, and at the same time
provide these agencies with the completed BA plus
any information on the proposed project and
project alternatives.
If action a. or b. above is taken, the state should
prepare the EA and ensure that the results of the BA
have been incorporated into the EA. Any mitigating
measures recommended by FWS or NMFS must also be
included in the EA. The EA should discuss the findings
of the biological assessment and any consultation with
the FWS or NMFS.
If action c. is taken, EPA must initiate, in writing,
formal section 7 consultation with the FWS and/or NMFS.
No project or EA can be approved until formal consulta-
tion has been completed.
STEP 5: Biological Opinion (Formal Section 7 Consultation)
After EPA initiates formal consultation, the FWS or
NMFS will render a biological opinion (BO) within a 90
day period that can be extended only by mutual consent
of all federal agencies involved. The BO can conclude
that:
The proposed action is not likely to jeopardize or
adversely affect an endangered species or critical
habitat. Mo further action is required and the
proposed project can proceed.
The proposed action is likely to jeopardize or
adversely affect an endangered species or critical
habitat. In this case, the project must be
stopped unless alternatives to avoid or mitigate
any impact to endangered species or critical
habitat can be found, or an exemption is granted
by the Endangered Species Committee through formal
consultation procedures.
7-4
-------
There is insufficient information to render an
opinion. FWS or NMFS could require additional
information before issuing a final opinion.
STEP 6: If the BO results in a determination of adverse affect
(jeopardy to species or adverse modification of habi-
tat), EPA may submit an application for exemption to
the Secretary of the Interior within 90 days after
issuance of the BO, or final determination after the
extended consultation process.
A review board is then established by the Secretary for
the purpose of considering the application for exemp-
tion and submitting a written report to the Endangered
Species Committee. The Secretary must submit the
application for exemption to the review board immedi-
ately after its appointment, and the Secretary's
recommendations within 60 days of that date. Also,
within 60 days after its appointment, the review board
must make its determination whether:
An irresolvable conflict exists, and
EPA has carried out its consultation responsi-
bilities in good faith and made a reasonable and
responsible effort to develop and fairly consider
modifications or alternatives to the project,
conducted the BA, and refrained from making any
irretrievable commitment of resources.
The review board determination must be presented to the
Endangered Species Committee within 180 days.
The Endangered Species Committee reviews the report
considering alternatives, benefits and regional or
national significance of the proposed project. The
Committee's final decision must be made within 90 days
of receiving the review board's report. If the exemp-
tion is granted, mitigation and enhancement measures
must be established. In addition, if the exemption is
granted it is permanent unless the Secretary of the
Interior finds that extinction of a species will occur.
The Committee must then, within 30 days of this find-
ing, reconsider the exemption and either uphold or
withdraw it.
There are three exceptions to the exemption determin-
ation process, which are:
The Secretary of State may prohibit exemptions for
actions which violate international treaty,
7-5
-------
The Secretary of Defense can grant an exemption on
the grounds of national security, and
The President can grant exemptions for disaster
areas.
STEP 7: When and if an exemption order is granted, the speci-
fied mitigation and enhancement measures must be funded
and carried out, and compliance must be reported to the
Council on Environmental Quality.
7-6
-------
AGRICULTURAL
LANDS
-------
CHAPTER 8 - SIGNIFICANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS
EPA's Statement of Policy to Protect Environmentally Significant
Agricultural Lands (September 8, 1978) defines prime farmland as "land
that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics
for producing food, feed, foraqe, fiber, and oilseed crops, and is
also available for these uses (the land could be cropland, pasture-
land, rangeland, forest land, or other land, but not developed land or
land under water). It has the soil quality, growing season, and
moisture supply needed to economically produce sustained high yields
of crops when treated and managed". This statement also defines
unique farmlands as "land other than prime farmland that is used for
the production of specific high value food and fiber crops. It has
the special combination of soil quality, location, growing season, and
moisture supply needed to economically produce sustained high quality
and/or high yields of a specific crop when treated and managed accord-
ing to acceptable farming methods".
8.1 Legis1ative/Regulatory Framework
A summary of agency policy statements and regulatory acts are
listed below, followed by a brief description of their content
and purpose. Although these policy statements and regulatory
acts provide some guidance in protecting significant agricultural
lands, no direct control has been established to prohibit devel-
opment of these environmentally sensitive areas. Only through
existing federal and state programs have any initiatives been
taken to discourage the practice of converting important agri-
cultural lands to other uses.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary's
Memorandum "No". 1827, Supplement 1, Statement of Prime"Farmland,
Range, and Forest Land, dated June 21, 1976
Memorandum No. 1827 outlines USDA's concern for the conversion of
prime agricultural lands to other irretrievable uses and sets
forth six policy recommendations to guide the agency's actions.
These policies place the agency (USDA) in an advocacy position
concerning preservation of prime farmland, make the agency
responsible for assuring that environmental impact statements and
reviews adequately address the issue of prime farmlands, and
place emphasis on both cooperative programs and agency programs
to increase concern and interest for the retention of prime
farmlands.
Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) - Memorandum for Heads of
Agencies - Subject: Analysis of Impacts on Prime and Unique
Farmland in Environmental Impact Statements, August 30, 1976
This CEQ memorandum directs that, in order to comply with NEPA
regulations, "Federal agencies should attempt to determine the
existence of prime and unique farmlands in the areas of impact
8-1
-------
analyzed in environmental impact statements". Although the
memorandum is directed at EIS's, by implication it covers all
environmental reviews.
EPA - Statement of Policy to Protect Environmentally Significant
Agricultural Lands, September 8, 1978
This statement presents EPA's policy "to protect the nation's
'environmentally significant' agricultural lands from irrever-
sible conversion to uses which result in its loss as an environ-
mental or essential food production resource".
The policy lists three specific directives for agency action,
which include:
1. A consideration of impacts on agricultural land shall be
incorporated within the process of developing new or revised
Agency regulations, standards, or guidance.
2. Direct and indirect impacts on agricultural land shall be
determined and mitigation measures recommended in environ-
mental assessments and reviews of environmental impact
statements.
3. The regional or local significance and economic value of
farmlands to communities shall be considered in Agency
enforcement actions.
CEQ - Memorandum for Heads of Agencies, - Analysis of Impacts on
Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands in Implementing the National'
Environmental Policy Act, August 11, 1980
This CEQ memorandum updates and supercedes the one issued in
1976. It was developed in response to CEQ and Government
Accounting Office (GAO) studies which indicated that federal
agencies had not adequately accounted for impacts of their
proposed actions on agricultural land through the environmental
assessment process. It suggests that agencies closely follow
recent CEQ guidance for implementing NEPA regulations. It
further stated that the assessment of effects on prime or unique
lands must be an integral part of the environmental assessment
process ana be addressed in deciding whether or not to prepare an
EIS. Significant effects to prime farmlands require that an EIS
be prepared. The USDA is directed to cooperate with all agencies
iri planning projects, assessing impacts and defining
alternatives. The USDA is further directed to provide technical
assistance, review EIS's regarding their potential impacts on
prime and unique farmland and to refer to CEQ those proposed
federal actions which it determines to be environmentally
unsatisfactory because of unacceptable effects on prime or unique
farmlands.
8-2
-------
EPA - Procedures for Implementing the Requirements of the Council
on Environmental Quality on the National Environmental Policy 5,ct
- (40 CFR Part 6)
The regulations address coordination with other environmental
review and consultation requirements including EPA's 1978 Envir-
onmentally Significant Agricultural Lands policy. Prior to
undertaking any action, the responsible official is required to
make a determination as to whether there are significant agri-
cultural lands in the project area. Adverse effects shall be
avoided or mitigated to the greatest extent possible.
Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 (FPPA)
The purpose of this Act is to minimize the extent to which
federal programs contribute to the unnecessary and irreversible
conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses, and to assure
that federal programs are administered in a manner that, to the
extent practicable, will be compatible with state and local
governments and private programs and policies to protect farm-
land.
Specifically, the Act outlines several measures to minimize the
impacts of federal programs on agricultural land:
The USDA, in cooperation with other departments,
agencies, and commissions, shall develop criteria for
identifying the effects of federal programs on the
conversion of farmland to other uses.
Federal agencies shall use the criteria established to
identify and take into account the adverse effects of
federal programs, consider alternate actions and, as
appropriate, lessen adverse impacts.
Federal agencies shall develop a proposal for action to
bring programs, policies and procedures into conformity
with the purpose of this Act wherever it is found to be
necessary.
Technical assistance to state and local governments
will be encouraged by the USDA where program and policy
developed to limit the conversion of farmland is
desi red.
The Secretary of the USDA, through existing agencies or
interagency groups, and in cooperation with the cooper-
ative extension services of the states, shall design
and implement educational programs and materials
emphasizing the importance of productive farmland to
the nation's well-being and distribute educational
materials through communications media, schools,
groups, and other federal agencies.
8-3
-------
USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) - Farmland Protection Policy
(7 CFR 658)
The final rules and regulations implement the criteria developed
by the Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with and pursuant
to the FPPA. The established criteria are to be used for identi-
fying and considering the effects of federal programs on the
conversion of farmlands to nonagricultural uses. Also, the
criteria will provide the means of identifying technical assist-
ance to agencies of local, state, and federal governments by the
Department of Agricultural. Federal agencies are (1) to use the
criteria to identify and take into account the adverse effects of
their programs on the preservation of farmlands, (2) to consider
alternative actions, as appropriate, that could lessen adverse
effects, and (3) to ensure that their programs, to the extent
practicable, are compatible with state and local government and
private programs and policies to protect farmland.
8.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for significant agricultural
lands are described below and are diagrammed in Figure 15.
During the scoping portion of the facility planning process, the
state should ensure that the applicant is aware of the require-
ments to identify agricultural lands and assess impacts to them.
The SCS and the local State Soil Conservation District should be
consulted throughout the process.
STEP 1: The applicant should consult with the SCS to determine
whether or not there are any significant agricultural
lands in the project area. If not, no further review
is required.
STEP 2: If there are significant agricultural lands in the
project area, they should be identified and delineated
by mapping their location and classification, and their
significance should be discussed in the EID (see
discussion concerning classification below). To
consider the significance of agricultural lands, the
state reviewer should submit a request to the SCS on
Form AD 1006, (see Appendix C) the Farmland Conversion
Impact Rating Form, for determination of whether the
project's site is farmland subject to the FPPA. If the
project's site is determined by SCS to be subject to
the FPPA, then SCS will measure the relative value of
the site as farmland in accordance with the criteria
provided in 7 CFR 658.5.
8-4
-------
PROCEDURES FOR SIGNIFICANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS REVIEW
FIGURE 15
STEPS
YES o
DETERMINE IF THERE ARE
SIGNIFICANT AGRICULTURAL
LANDS IN THE PROJECT AREA
o NO
IDENTIFY. DELINEATE AND
DISCUSS CLASSIFIED
SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE LANDS
EVALUATE THE PROPOSED
ACTION'S IMPACT ON
THESE LANDS
4
DESCRIBE MITIGATION
MEASURES
o PROCEED <»
-------
STEP 3: The EA should assess and evaluate direct (location of
facilities) and indirect (induced development) effects
of the proposed action on significant agricultural
lands.
STEP 4: The EA should describe measures to be taken to avoid or
mitigate those adverse effects identified to the
greatest extent possible, as stated in EPA's policy to
protect environmentally significant agricultural land
[40 CFR 6.302(c)]. A list of possible mitigation
measures is included in Appendix G.
The state will review the EID to ensure that agricul-
tural lands have been identified, mapped, adequately
assessed for direct and indirect impacts, and that
adverse impacts have been avoided or mitigated to the
maximum extent possible.
The EID should present either graphically and/or in
detailed discussion, the extent to which any projected
growth conflicts with the various classifications of
agricultural lands.
Significant agricultural lands should serve as a
constraint on population projections and the distribu-
tion of that population.
If significant agricultural lands are present, the
EA should discuss the extent of direct or indirect
impacts to such lands and possible alternatives and
mitigation measures.
If interceptors and/or collection systems are located
on environmentally significant agricultural lands, the
EA should evaluate whether this is unavoidable and
necessary to serve existing habitation or eliminate
existing discharges.
If sludge, compost, and/or wastewater is to be applied
to agricultural land which is highly erodible or
acidic, consultation with the SCS should be conducted.
8-5
-------
WILD & SCENIC
RIVERS
-------
CHAPTER 10 - WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
Wild and scenic rivers are defined by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
of 1968 as "selected rivers in the Nation which, within their imme-
diate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recrea-
tional, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other
similar values". A list of rivers on or eligible for the National
Wild and Scenic River Inventory is presented in Appendix F.
10.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 1274)
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (P.L. 90-542, as amended)
prohibits the approval of any federal funds which would have
a direct adverse effect on those characteristics which
caused the river to be classified as wild, scenic or recrea-
tional. Each category is accorded a different level of
protection. The Act is administered jointly by the Depart-
ments of Agriculture and the Interior. A river is added to
the system by federal or state legislation with the approval
of the Secretary of the Interior.
To assist in determining which rivers should be designated,
the Secretary of the Interior, with the assistance of the
Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, has been
directed to prepare an inventory of candidate rivers. From
this list, Congress may choose to instantly designate a
river or may choose to authorize a further study of the
river. In the latter case, the National Park Service or the
Forest Service carries out the study to determine the
advisability of including the river and to devise a manage-
ment plan. Based on the report, Congress may then decide to
designate the river.
The inventory focuses on those rivers nominated by govern-
ment agencies, private groups and/or individuals, which are
significant for their recreational, cultural and natural
values. Each of these rivers must meet the criteria of the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, which specifies that an eligible
river must:
Be five miles or more in length,
Be a free-flowing river or stream (rivers may have
undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past),
Be generally undeveloped (rivers may be developed for
the full range of agricultural uses and can include
small communities as well as dispersed or cluster
residential housing),
10-1
-------
Not be readily accessible by road or railroad,
Be largely undeveloped (rivers or sections of rivers
with shorelines or watersheds essentially primative or
largely undeveloped), or
Be adjacent to or within a related land area that
possesses an outstandingly remarkable geologic, cultur-
al, historic, scenic, botanical, recreational or other
similar value (interpreted to mean an area of multi-
state or national significance).
Under the Act, different requirements apply to "designated"
rivers, rivers under "study" and rivers identified in the
"inventory". These requirements are summarized as follows:
For a "designated" river, no federally funded project
may be authorized which would have a direct and adverse
effect on the values from which the river was estab-
lished without advising the Secretary of the Interior
(or in the case of a river within a national forest,
the Secretary of Agriculture) and Congress. The
Department of Interior has determined that any project
construction within one-quarter mile or within the
visual field of the river could have a direct and
adverse impact.
For a river under "study" the provisions cited above
apply for a three year period following its designation
as a potential addition to the national system.
However, if the Secretary of the Interior or the
Secretary of Agriculture makes a determination that the
river under study should not be included in the nation-
al wild and scenic rivers system and notice is publish-
ed in the Federal Register these provisions do not
apply.
For a river included in the "inventory" there is nc
specific protection mandated by the Act. The Presi-
dent's Environmental Message of August 2, 1979, how-
ever, directs federal agencies to avoid or mitigate any
adverse impacts on rivers identified in the inventory.
10.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for National Wild and Scenic
Rivers are described below and diagramed in Figure 17. To comply
with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the reviewer must determine
from the Secretary of the Interior or Agriculture that the
project will not directly and adversely impact any wild, scenic
or recreational river area.
10-2
-------
PROCEDURES FOR WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS REVIEW
FIGURE 17
STEPS
YES <»
n
DETERMINE IF PROPOSED ACTION
MAY IMPACT ANY WILD. SCENIC
OR RECREATIONAL RIVER AREA
i* NO
DETERMINE IF PROPOSED ACTION
INVOLVES CONSTRUCTION NEAR RIVER
o NO
YES
EVALUATE PRIMARY IMPACTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT
DETERMINE IF PROPOSED ACTION WILL
RESULT IN CONDITIONS CONSISTENT
WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE RIVER
NO
YES
ELIMINATE PROPOSED ACTION
FROM CONSIDERATION AND
REEVALUATE ALTERNATIVES
-------
STEP 1: As early as possible in the planning process, the
applicant/state should determine* from the Secretary of
the Interior or Agriculture if there are any designated
or officially recognized wild, scenic or recreational
rivers in the planning area or if any such rivers are
under study for inclusion in the system. If none, the
analysis is complete.
STEP 2: If the project area contains either a designated river
or one under study, it must be determined for each
alternative whether (1) construction is planned near
the river, (2) growth is projected for areas contiguous
to or upstream from the designated segment, or (3) the
river is to be used for disposal of effluent. If any
of the above conditions are present, a more detailed
evaluation is necessary.
STEP 3: If it is determined that a more detailed evaluation is
necessary, the state reviewer must evaluate the primary
impacts associated with the project. In particular,
the impacts associated with the scenic or recreational
qualities of the river as well as possible mitigating
measures (such as landscaping in order to camouflage
buildings) should be evaluated.
STEP 4: If any alternative plan under consideration will result
in conditions inconsistent with the character of the
designated segment, it must be eliminated from consid-
eration as unacceptable. It must be noted that the
classification of the particular river has a bearing on
what is considered an acceptable impact. For example,
any alteration of a wild river is unacceptable, al-
though some impacts upon recreational rivers are
permitted.
Secondary impacts are not specifically addressed by the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, but NEPA regulations
require that they be discussed. When considering
secondary impacts, the state reviewer must determine if
the construction of the sewage treatment facilities
will encourage development of lend adjacent to or
upstream from these river segments, and discuss how
this development will affect the river in the environ-
mental assessment.
Rivers are often legal boundaries and development may
be subject to intergovernmental plans or arrangements.
Reference must be made to such conditions, if they
exist, in the environmental assessment.
10-3
-------
COASTAL ZONES
-------
CHAPTER 11 - COASTAL ZONES
Coastal zones are defined by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
section 304(1) as "the coastal waters (including the lands therein and
thereunder) and the adjacent shorelands (including the waters therein
and thereunder), strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to
the shorelines of the several coastal states, and includes islands,
transitional and intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands, and
beaches".
11.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC 1451)
Section 307(c) of the Coasta] Zone Management Act requires
that any federal agency "conducting or supporting activities
directly effecting the coastal zone shall do so in a manner
which is, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with
approved state (coastal zone management) programs". The Act
also requires federal agencies undertaking such activities
to provide a certification that the proposed activities will
comply and be consistent with the state's approved manage-
ment plan to the appropriate licensing or permitting agency.
This certification, also known as a "consistency determina-
tion", must be presented in application for a required
federal license or permit to conduct any activity affecting
land or water uses in the coastal zone. The appropriate
licensing or permitting agency is generally the state
environmental agency's office of coastal zone management or
the equivalent (see Appendix D.6).
The Act encourages each coastal state to develop a coastal
zone management, plan which provides for "increased speci-
ficity in protecting significant natural resources, reason-
able coastal-dependent economic growth, improved protection
of life and property in hazardous areas, and improved
predictability in governmental decision-making" (section
303(3)). To date, twenty eight (28) of the thirty five (35)
coastal states have approved such plans. In effect, these
plans regulate land and water use specifically for the
coastal zones. Federal agencies may not approve proposed
projects which are judged to be inconsistent with a state's
approved management plan, unless this judgement is overrid-
den by the Secretary of Commerce, who has principal authori-
ty over the Federal coastal zone management program.
11.2 Environmental Review Procedures
The environmental review procedures for coastal zones are de-
scribed below and diagramed in Figure 18.
11-1
-------
PROCEDURES FOR COASTAL ZONE REVIEW
FIGURE 18
STEPS
1
YES
£_
DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE
PROPOSED ACTION MAY DIRECTLY
AFFECT A COASTAL ZONE
o NO
n~
ASSESS IMPACT OF PROPOSED ACTION
AND ALTERNATIVES ON THE COASTAL ZONE
SEEK CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
WITH APPROVED STATE COASTAL
ZONE MANAEEMENT PLAN
CONSISTENT
INCONSISTENT
_S_
ELIMINATE PROPOSED ACTION
FROM CONSIDERATION AND
REEVALUATE ALTERNATIVES
SECRETARY OF COMMERCE
OVERULES DETERMINATION
V
o PROCEED **
-------
STEP 1: As early as possible during the planning process, the
applicant should consult with the state office of
coastal zone management (or equivalent) in order to
determine whether or not the proposed action may
directly affect a coastal zone for which an approved
management plan exists. If not, the analysis is
complete.
STEP 2: If the proposed action may directly affect a coastal
zone, the state shall assess the impact of the proposed
action and each alternative to the proposed action on
the coastal zone.
STEP 3: If the proposed action may affect the coastal zone for
which there is an approved management plan, the state
must seek a consistency determination (a certification
of the action's consistency with the approved manage-
ment plan from the state office of coastal zone manage-
ment or equivalent (see Appendix D)). This consistency
determination must be sought in accordance with proce-
dures promulgated by the Federal office of coastal zone
management in 15 CFR 930. If the proposed action is
judged to be not consistent with the management plan,
EPA may not approve or fund this action unless the
Secretary of Commerce determines that the action is
consistent with the purposes of the Coastal Zone
Management Act or is necessary in the interest of
national security. Consistency with the coastal zone
management plan should be documented in the EA.
11-2
-------
CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS
-------
CHAPTER 12 - CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL-RELATED IMPACTS
12.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework
A summary of agency policy statements and regulatory acts con-
cerning mitigation measures to reduce or avoid construction and
operational-related impacts from wastewater treatment facilities
are listed below.
EPA - Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works; Construction
Grants Program - (40 CFR 357
These construction grants regulations address the primary
and secondary environmental impacts associated with waste-
water treatment facilities. The EID assessment must evalu-
ate these impacts and provide appropriate mitigating mea-
sures, such as rerouting of interceptors to avoid environ-
mentally sensitive areas.
EPA - Procedures and Requirements Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act for the Municipal_Wastewater
Treatment Construction Grants Program - (40 CFR 6)
These regulations address coordination with other environ-
mental review and consultation requirements for cultural
resources, wetlands, floodplains, agricultural lands,
coastal zones, wild and scenic rivers, fish and wildlife
resources, endangered species, air quality and other envir-
onmental resources.
12.2 Environmental Review Procedures
STEP 1: As part of the facility planning process, the EID
should identify and evaluate the potential for con-
struction and operational-related impacts. Where
appropriate and as a minimal requirement, these docu-
ments should address the potential for soil erosion and
sedimentation, air quality impacts (including odors)
and noise impacts.
In determining the potential for soil erosion and
sedimentation, the following areas (where appropriate)
should be considered and evaluated:
Soil and geologic characteristics,
Land topography and land use classification
(including type of vegetative cover, wildlife
habitats, proximity to surface water),
12-1
-------
Drainage basin conditions, and
Rainfall and wind characteristics.
Special attention should be given where steep slopes,
acid soils, highly erodible soils or high water tables
are found. Construction procedures and constraints
should be addressed and incorporated in the plans and
specifications when these potential problem conditions
are encountered. For project sites where dewatering
operations are required during construction, adverse
effects from the discharge of silt-laden waters should
be mitigated by means of proper soil erosion and
sediment control measures (e.g., sediment basins).
The existence of acid soils and subsoils (e.g., - the
central portion of the State of New Jersey) presents a
unique problem for restoration of easements and other
disturbed areas where this material is found. Upon
exposure to air and water, this material forms a
concentrated acid which prevents normal restorative
measures. Special attention to these soil types should
be noted during the facility planning process and,
where applicable, a detailed restorative plan should be
developed. Many areas where these soil types exist
have been mapped by the Soil Conservation Service and
specific measures for mitigating their impacts follow-
ing construction should be included prior to the review
of plans and specifications (see Appendix G). Further
measures can be obtained by contacting the Soil Conser-
vation Service or the local Soil Conservation District
office.
For projects involving land treatment or disposal,
methods of application should be carefully studied and
selected to ensure that soil erosion and sediment
runoff are minimized. The facilities plan should
contain specific soil erosion and sediment control
measures which are proposed for use during construction
and maintained until restoration and the project are
completed.
For soil erosion and sediment control, the project
plans and specifications should include the following:
A schedule for land clearing and grading in
relation to the corresponding schedule for each
structure to be built. If at all possible, the
clearing of vegetation or disruption of soil
should precede the construction activity;
12-?
-------
Specifications for temporary and permanent mea-
sures should be used for controlling erosion and
sedimentation including a schedule and specific
location for each measure. Wherever possible, the
plan should specify a sequence of operations
(staging) whereby critical areas (steep slopes,
acid soils, etc.) are stabilized first;
A separate list containing: (a) chronological
completion dates for each temporary and permanent
measure for controlling erosion and sediment; (b)
location, type and purpose for each measure; and
(c) date when those temporary measures will be
removed or replaced. This list will serve as a
guide for contractors as well as field inspectors
during and after construction;
Appropriate maintenance procedures for each
sediment control structure should be specified in
detail in the operation and maintenance manual
required as part of the construction grant; and
The appropriate engineering principles should be
applied when evaluating for soil erosion and
sediment control measures, including but not
limited to the measures listed in Appendix G.
Potential air quality impacts (including odors) should
be identified and evaluated in the EID. Additional
requirements concerning potential primary impacts from
construction should be assessed during the review of
plans and specifications.
Noise impacts related to construction and the operation
of the wastewater treatment facilities (e.g., pump
stations) should be addressed during the review of both
the facility plan and the plans and specifications.
For long-term secondary noise impacts associated with
wastewater treatment plants, proper siting of the
facilities and the use of buffer zones and/or noise
barriers can help to minimize adverse effects.
STEP 2: Prior to and during the review of plans and specifi-
cations, primary impacts should be identified and
evaluated in order to provide a background for more
detailed analysis of minimizing adverse effects. The
project plans and specifications should include all
structural and nonstructural practices and designs for
soil erosion and sediment control, dust and emission
control, odor control and noise abatement during
construction. The plans should be consistent with the
general program measures set forth in the facilities
plan.
12-3
-------
STEP 3: During construction, the state, EPA and other appro-
priate local, state and federal agencies should coor-
dinate their efforts to effectively carry out periodic
on-site inspections. The objective of these inspec-
tions is to ensure compliance with the required miti-
gation measures and to ensure that necessary corrective
steps are taken where it is found that (a) sediment
control measures originally specified were not adequate
and (b) additional measures are needed for problems not
anticipated in the design phase.
For on-site problems relating to soil erosion and
sediment control, drainage problems, etc., field
assistance may be obtained by request from the USDA
Soil Conservation Service and/or the local Soil Conser-
vation District office. Additional information is also
contained in the EPA Construction Inspection Guide
(1976), which is a three volume set covering issues
relating to the day-to-day construction inspections of
municipal wastewater treatment facilities.
12-4
-------
SOC./EC. IMPACTS
-------
CHAPTER 13 - SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The social and economic impacts discussed in this chapter deal with a
variety of topics, including community impact analysis, user costs,
financial capability of applicants and the public participation
process. The requirements that EPA and the states must fulfill to
meet the responsibilities and guidance outlined in regulatory acts and
policy statements have undergone significant changes in the past. In
part, these changes are the result of efforts to delegate existing
federal programs to the states. For reasons of clarity, this chapter
of the manual has been divided into three (3) segments: public
participation, economic impacts and social impacts.
13.1.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework - Public Participation
The public participation requirements applicable to NEPA
reviews include the provisions outlined in several
regulatory acts and policy statements and are listed below:
EPA - Overall Public Participation Regulations, 40 CFR 25,
issued February 16, 1979
These regulations establish EPA's responsibility to provide
for meaningful public input into programs carried out under
the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The regulations
include general provisions which require open processes of
government and efforts to promote public awareness in the
course of making decisions in programs and activities under
the three acts. Also included are requirements which apply
to specific public participation mechanism, such as public
hearings and advisory groups. These regulations do not
require the use of the specific mechanisms. The mechanisms
must be used only if they are required in program regula-
tions.
This part sets forth minimum requirements and suggested
program elements for public participation in activities
under the above referenced acts. The applicability of the
requirements of this part is as follows:
Basic requirements and suggested program elements for
public information, public notification and public
consultation. These requirements are intended to
foster public awareness and open processes of govern-
ment decision-making;
Requirements and suggested program elements which
govern the structure of particular public participation
mechanisms (i.e., advisory groups, responsiveness
summaries);
13-1
-------
Requirements which apply to federal financial assist-
ance programs (grants and cooperative agreements) under
the three acts; and
Requirements for public involvement which apply to
specific activities such as permit enforcement, rule-
making, and assuring compliance with requirements.
EPA - Procedures and Requirements Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act for the Municipal Wastewater
Treatment Construction Grants Program, 40 CFR Part 6, issued
September 12, 1986
According to these regulations, EPA shall make diligent
efforts to involve the public in the environmental review
process that is consistent with program regulations and EPA
policies on public participation. Requirements for issuing
notices of intent, public meetings and hearings, findings of
no significant impact and records of decision are outlined
in these regulations. Under the general public participa-
tion process, EPA shall ensure compliance with 40 CFR 25 and
40 CFR 35, Subpart E, during the environmental review
process.
40 CFR 6.513 requires conducting a public meeting during
development of a wastewater facility plan and a public
hearing prior to adoption of the plan.
Other EPA Public Participation Guidance
Specific information concerning the mechanisms used in the
public participation process can be found in the "Region II
Guide to Public Participation in Wastewater Facilities
Planning, Design and Construction", issued September 1980.
Details and criteria of regional program requirements are
outlined for grants, user charges, the industrial cost
recovery system, how to prepare public notices, etc., in
this guidance manual.
13.1.2 Environmental Review Procedures - Public Participation
The reviewer should ensure that the required level of public
participation has been provided by the applicant. The EA
should summarize the public participation program followed
during planning of the project, should document the dates of
public meetings and hearings, and should identify any unre-
solved public controversy arising from the proposed project.
13-2
-------
13.2.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework - Economic Impacts
The most recent regulatory guidance for economic impacts is
listed below, followed by a brief description of its content
and purpose. In considering economic impacts it is impor-
tant to understand the major changes made to wastewater
facility funding by the 1987 Clean Water Act Amendments.
EPA is presently in the process of developing policies and
procedures for implementing these changes. The outcome will
have important effects on the economic impacts of wastewater
facility projects.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Con-
struction Grants 1985 (CG-85), dated July 1984
This document includes provisions of the Municipal Waste-
water Treatment Construction Grants Amendment in 1981,
enacted on December 29, 1981, and its implementing regula-
tions published as a final rule in the Federal Reqister on
May 12, 1982.
As part of an effort to simplify and delegate the construc-
tion grants program, various regulatory requirements and
discretionary guidance are restated in CG-85. Criteria are
presented which identify total annual charges to customers,
after federal and other funding is determined, for waste-
water treatment facilities. It is further recommended that
the cost-effectiveness analysis be thoroughly reviewed to
ensure that lower cost alternatives have not been overlooked
and that estimates are verified to be adequate and reason-
able. Also, measures are outlined to ensure that low cost
projects for small communities are planned and selected.
Financial Capability Guidebook, February 1983, Office of
Water Programs Operations.
Guidance concerning the financial capability of grant
applicants is fully discussed. To ensure that potential
projects are not a financial burden to customers, this
guidance strongly suggests measures to be followed in
protecting local communities from irresponsible fiscal
planning in the construction grants program.
13.2.2 Environmental Review Procedures - Economic Impacts
During detailed facility planning and prior to the award of
a grant, a determination of the financial capability of
grant applicants to construct and operate proposed waste-
water treatment facilities should be made. The reduced
level of the present federal funding support (from 75% to
55% of eligible costs on October 1, 1984 and the eventual
phasing out of federal assistance by 1994) may require that
13-3
-------
changes be made for calculating the total annual charges to
customers (user costs) for proposed facilities. This
reduced share of monies available to the states for the
construction grants program will necessitate changes that
place even greater emphasis on selecting projects with the
most cost-effective alternate and, at the same time, that
derive the most significant environmental benefits.
Federal grant assistance for innovative and alternative
(I&A) technology projects can presently be funded up to, but
not greater than, the 75 percent level.
The EA should document the local economic impact of the
proposed project and its effect upon individual system
users.
13.3.1 Legislative/Regulatory Framework - Social Impacts
The environmental review of social impacts associated with
wastewater treatment projects includes an evaluation of
community services, facilities, and infrastructure. The
existing local facilities and services to be affected by the
proposed project must be addressed during the facility
planning process. Prior to this step, a "Community Impact
Analysis" (CIA) may be required as part of the overall
effort to strengthen existing urban area economics, reduce
suburban sprawl and conserve energy. Moreover, a CIA may be
needed in order to ensure that federal funds are targeted in
such a way that federal programs do not work at cross
purposes to each other.
U.S. Community Conservation Guidance, issued 1979
This document provides procedures for reviewing certain
federal actions when an action is anticipated to result in
damaging an existing downtown commercial area by subsidizing
competing development. In the case where possible adverse
impacts are anticipated, local community officials can
request that a CIA be carried out by the responsible agency.
If the study demonstrates significant negative consequences,
the responsible agency must try to modify the project or
mitigate the adverse impacts.
The guidance specifies that these studies be coordinated
with NEPA requirements whenever possible. It should be
noted that developing sufficient information on these types
of impacts during the NEPA process could prevent the need
for a CIA later. The Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) is overseeing implementation of this
procedure. This guidance has been seldom used; however, it
is still an active policy and is, therefore, contained in
this document.
13-4
-------
13.3.2 Environmental Review Procedures - Social Impacts
The environmental review procedures for social impacts are
discussed below and diagrammed in Figure 19.
STEP 1: The state should review the facility plan (or EID)
for impacts associated with the following interre-
lated community services or facilities and discuss
them in the EA, if appropriate:
Educational facilities - issues to be consid-
ered and evaluated regarding a proposed
project include adequate capacity for local
schools to adjust for a possible increased
population and the need to provide and
maintain safe access. Safe access takes into
account the possible need for additional
transportation and the potential for in-
creased traffic hazards;
Commercial facilities - an evaluation should
be included concerning the adequacy of
existing commercial facilities to service
present needs and the eventual impact that
the project will have on existing and sur-
rounding commercial establishments;
Health care facilities - issues to be con-
sidered regarding a proposed project's impact
on health care services including:
adequate access to hospitals, emergency
facilities, clinics and physician
services;
potential effects on existing health
care services' capacity and ability to
accommodate an increase in use; and
adequate health services to accommodate
special needs of a potentially diverse
population, (e.g., elderly, handi-
capped);
Social services - factors to be considered
regarding a proposed project's impact on a
community's social services including ade-
quate and accessible day care centers, senior
citizen centers, and neighborhood centers
available to accommodate existing, as well as
potential increases in population;
13-5
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
FIGURE 19
STEPS
YES
DETERMINE IF THERE ARE
SOCIAL AND/OR
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
-t> NO
IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE IMPACTS
ASSURE THAT IMPACTS HAVE
BEEN AVOIDED OR MITIGATED
t> PROCEED
-------
Public safety services - this includes
police, fire and ambulances available for
existing and future needs. Important factors
to be considered when a proposed project may
increase the demand on these services are
emergency service personnel and equipment,
response time and access;
Open space, recreation and cultural resources
- this includes such items as ballfields,
gardens, nature trails, parks, libraries,
museums and theatres. All of these types of
resources and facilities should be assessed
for potential impacts; and
Transportation - factors to be considered
regarding a proposed project's impact on
transportation includes access, balance of
alternative systems, safety and level of
service. The facility plan review should be
evaluated based upon existing and future
demands following the completion of the
project.
Other aspects of a community's services and
facilities include storm drainage, water supply
arid solid waste disposal. The state should review
the facility plan (or EID) for possible impacts to
these areas as well. Similarily, the socioecono-
mic characteristics, including demographic
changes, displacement and employment and income
patterns, should be considered either in the
review of the environmental constraints analysis
or during the assessment of user costs.
STEP 2: The state reviewer should ensure that social and
economic impacts have been avoided or mitigated to
the extent practicable prior to recommending
issuance of a finding of no significant impact and
environmental assessment (FNSI/EA). Where signifi-
cant adverse impacts are anticipated, EPA will
consider whether an EIS should be prepared under
the criteria presented in 40 CFR 6.506(a)(1).
13-6
-------
OTHER ENV
LAWS & REGS
-------
CHAPTER 14 - OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS
In addition to the statutes discussed in the previous chapters, there
are others that must be considered during environmental review if
certain conditions are present. Federal statutes governing two other
environmental resources are discussed in this chapter. The reviewer
should be aware that depending on project conditions, there may be
other federal and state statutes that must be considered. Careful
project scoping and coordination with the appropriate contacts listed
ir. Appendix D is essential in order to identify these statutes and the
environmental review procedures that they require.
14.1 National Natural Landmarks
Natural landmarks are designated and protected by the Department
of Interior's National Park Service (NPS) under the provisions of
NEPA and the Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act of
1935. The NPS has established the National Natural Landmarks
(NNL) Program and maintains a National Registry of Natural
Landmarks. NPS works in cooperation with appropriate government
agencies and private interest groups to encourage the preserva-
tion of lands that are significantly representative of the
ecological and geological character of the United States.
EPA1 s Procedures and Requirements Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act for the Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Construction Grants Program (40 CFR 6.301) require that "in
conducting an environmental 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 62.6(d) to avoid undesirable impacts
upon such landmarks".
The purpose of the NNL Program is to promote awareness of the
nation's natural heritage and consideration of these resources in
both public and private planning efforts. While the NPS may
designate an area as a Natural Landmark, it does not own the
land. The land owner may voluntarily agree with NPS to protect
and allow ecological and geological studies on the land, but no
rights or privileges of ownership are relinguished to NPS.
14.2 Coastal Barriers
The Coastal Barrier Resource Act of 1982 (16 USC 3501) recognizes
the importance of the coastal barriers along the Atlantic and
Gulf coasts and the adjacent wetlands, marshes, estuaries, inlets
and nearshore waters. It established the Coastal Barriers
Resources System consisting of the undeveloped coastal barriers
14-1
-------
along these coasts. In addition, it established certain limita-
tions on Federal expenditures affecting the system. Specifi-
cally, 40 CFR 6.302(f) requires the reviewer "ensure that con-
sultation is 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
Resource Act in accord with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
published guidelines defining new expenditures and financial
assistance, and describing procedures for consultation at 48 FR
45664 (October 6, 1983).
Environmental Review Procedures for Other Environmental Laws and
Regulations'
Whenever the reviewer encounters a situation which is not ad-
dressed by the available guidance, assistance from the agency
responsible for implementing the particular law or regulation and
EPA should be sought. EPA - Region II's Environmental Impacts
Branch should also be contacted and can provide technical assist-
ance in dealing with other Federal Agencies.
14-2
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
APPENDIX A
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES
AND REGULATIONS
-------
APPENDIX A1
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 (NEPA)
-------
THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT OF 1969, AS AMENDED*
An Act to establish a national policy for the environment, to provide for
the establishment of a Council on Environmental Quality, and for other
purposes.
Be U enaeted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of Ameriea in Congress assembled. That this Act may be cited as the
"National Environmental Policy Act of 1969."
PURPOSE
See. 2. The purposes of this Act are: To declare a national policy which
will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his
environment; to promote efforts which wilt 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
resources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on Environ-
mental Quality.
TITLE I
DECLARATION OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Sec. 101. (a) The Congress, recognizing the profound impact of man's
activity on the interrelations of all components of the natural environment,
particularly the profound influences of population growth, high-density urban-
ization, 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 governments, and other
concerned public and private organizations, to use all practicable means and
measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated
to :oiter 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 genera-
tions of Americans.
(b) In order to carry out the policy set forth in this Act, it is the con-
tinuing 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 resource* to the
end thai 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, productive, and esthetically
and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment with-
out degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unin-
tended consequences;
(4) preserve important historic, cultural, and naturai aspects of our
national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment
which supports diversity, and variety of individual choice;
(5) achieve t balance between population and resource 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.
•Pub. L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, January 1, 1970, as amended by
Pub. L. 94-52, July 3, 1975, and Pub. L. 94-83, August 9, 1975.
Al-1
-------
(c) The Congreu recognizes that each person should enjoy a healthful
environment and that each person ha« a responsibility to contribute to the
preservation and enhancement of the environment.
Sic. 102. The Congreu authorize! 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 *hi« Act, and (2) all agencies o( the Federal Government shall—
(A) Utilize a syr'emaf'c, interdisciplinary approach which will insure
the integrated use of the natural and social scunces and the environ-
mental 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 decision-
making along with economic and technical considerations;
(Q Include in every recommendation or report on proposals for
legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the respon-
sible official on—
(i) The environmental impact of the proposed action,
(ii) Any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided
should the proposal be implemented,
(sis} 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 commitments 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 environ-
mental 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;
(d) Any detailed statement required under subparagraph (c) after
January 1, 1970, for any major Federal acnon 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 Slate agency or official has statewide jurisdiction and
has the responsibility for such action,
(ii) the responsible Federal official furnishes guidance and par-
ticipates in such preparation,
Mii) the responsible Federal official independently evaluates such
statement prior to its approval and adoption, and
(iv) after January 1, 1976, the responsible Federal official pro-
vides early notification to, and solicits the views of, any other State
or any Federal land management entity of any action or any alterna-
tive thereto which may have significant impacts upon such State or
affected Federal land management entity and, if there is any dis-
agreement on such impacts, prepares a written UKismenl of such
impacts and views for incorporation into such detailed statement
The prc/cedures in this subparagraph shall not relieve the Federal official
of his responsibilities for the scope, objectivity, and content of the entire
statement or of any other responsibility under this Act; and further, this
subparagraph does not affect the legal sufficiency of statements prepared
by State agencies with less thsn statewide jurisdiction
Al-2
-------
(e) Study, develop, and describe ipproprixte alternatives to recom-
mended 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 environ-
mental problems and, where consistent with the foreign policy of the
United States, lend appropriate support to initiative], resolutions, and
programs designed to international cooperation in anticipating
and preventing a decline in the quality of .mankind's world environment;
(g) Make available to States, counties, municipalities, 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 re source-oriented projects; and
(i) Assist the Council oe Environmental Quality established by title
II of this Act.
Sic. 103. All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present
statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and pro-
cedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or
inconsistencies 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. 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 contin-
gent upon the recommendations or certification of any other Federal or State
agency.
Sic. 105. The policies and goals set forth in this Act are supplementary to
those set forth in existing authorisations of Federal agencies.
TITLE II
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Sic. 201. 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, including,
but not limited to, the air, the aquatic, including marine, estuarine, and fresh
water, and the terrestrial environment, 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 re-
sources 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 con-
servation, development and utilization of natural resources; and (5) a pro-
gram for remedying the deficiencies of existing programs and activities, to-
gether with recommendations for legislation.
Sec. 202. There is created in the Executive Office of the President a Coun-
cil 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 environmental trends and information of all kinds; to
appraise programs 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
Al-3
-------
the scientific, economic, social, esthetic, and cultural needs and interests of
the Nation, and to formulate and recommend national policies to promote t.ie
improvement of (he quality of the environment.
Sec. 203. The Council may employ such officen and employees ai may be
necessary to carry out iu functions under this Act In addition, the Counci'
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 accord-
arce with lection 3109 of title 5, United States Code (but without regard
to the last sentence thereof).
Sec. 204. It shall be the duty and function of the Council—
(1) to assist and advise the President in the preparation of the En-
vironmental Quality Report required by section 201 of this title;
(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, research, and analyses
relating to ecological systems and environmental quality,
(6) to document and define changes in the natural environment, in-
cluding 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 leajt once each year to the President on the state and
condition of the environment, and
(8) to make and fumuh such studies, reports thereon, and recom-
mendations with respect to matters of policy and legislation ai the Preti-
dent may request.
Sec. 205. In exercising iu powers, functions, and duties under this Act, the
Council shall—
(1) Consult with the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Environmental
Quality established by Executive Order No 11472, dated May 29, 1969,
and with such representatives of science, industry, agriculture, labor, con-
servation organizations. State and local governments and other groupt,
as it deems advisable; and
(2) Utilize, to the fullest extent possible, the services, facilities and
information (including statistical information) 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 bv law and performed by established agencies.
Sec. 206. 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 U.S.C. 5313). The other memben of the
Council shall be compensated at the rate provided for Level IV of the Execu-
tive Schedule Pay Rates (5 U.S.C. 5315)
Sec. 207. The Council may accept reimbursements from any private non-
profit organization or from any department, 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. Thr Council may make expenditures in support of iu interna-
tional activities, including expenditures for (1) international travel, (2)
activities in implementation of international agreements, and (3) the sup-
Al-4
-------
port o( international exchange programs in the United States and in foreign
countries.
Sic. 209. There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the provi-
lioni of thii chapter not to exceed $300,000 for fiscal year 1970, $700,000
for fiscal year 1971, and $1,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter.
Al-5
-------
APPENDIX A2
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REGULATIONS
40 CFR PART 1500
-------
Council on Environmental Quality
Executive Office of the President
REGULATIONS
For Implementing The Procedural Provisions Of The
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT
Reprint
40 CFR Parts 1500-1508
(as of July 1, 1986)
A2-1
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1300—PURPOSE, POLICY, AND
MANDATE
Sec.
1500.1 Purpose.
1500.2 Policy.
1500.3 Mandate.
1500.4 Reducing paperwork.
1500.5 Reducing delay.
1500.0 Agency authority.
PART 1501—HEPA AND AGENCY
PLANNING
1501.1 Purpose.
1501.2 Apply NEPA early In the process.
1501.3 When to prepare an environmen-
tal assessment.
1501.4 Whether to prepare an environ-
mental Impact statement.
1501.5 Lead agencies.
1601.6 Cooperating agencies.
1501.7 Scoping.
1501.8 Time limits.
PART 1502—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT
1502.1 Purpose.
1502.2 Implementation.
1502.3 Statutory requirements for state-
ments.
1502.4 Major Federal actions requiring
the preparation of environmental
Impact statements.
1502.5 Timing.
1502.6 Interdisciplinary preparation.
1502.7 Page limits.
1502.8 Writing.
1502.0 Draft, final, and supplemental
statements.
1502.10 Recommended format.
1502.11 Cover sheet.
1502.12 Summary.
1502.13 Purpose said need.
1502.14 Alternatives Including the pro-
posed action.
1502.15 Affected environment.
1502.18 Environmental consequences.
1502.17 List of preparers.
1502.18 Appendix.
1502.19 Circulation of the environmen-
tal impact statement.
1502.20 Tiering.
1502.21 Incorporation by reference.
1502.22 Incomplete or unavailable Infor-
mation.
Sec.
1502.23 Cost-benefit analysis.
1502.24 Methodology and scientific ac-
curacy.
1502.25 Environmental review and con-
sultation requirements.
PART 1503—COMMENTING
1503.1 Inviting comments.
1503.2 Duty to comment.
1503.3 Specificity of comments.
1503.4 Response to comments.
PART 1504—PREDEaSION REFCRRALS TO
THE COUNCIL OF PROPOSED FEDERAL
ACTIONS DETERMINED TO BE ENVIRON-
MENTALLY UNSATISFACTORY
1504.1 Purpose.
1504.2 Criteria for referral.
1504.3 Procedure for referrals and re-
sponse.
PART 1505—NEPA AND AGENCY
DECISIONMAKING
1505.1 Agency decisionmaking proce-
dures.
1505.2 Record of decision in cases re-
quiring environmental impact state-
ments.
1505.3 Implementing the decision.
PART 1506—OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF
NEPA
1506.1 Limitations on actions during
NEPA process.
1506.2 Elimination of duplication with
State and local procedures.
1506.3 Adoption.
1506.4 Combining documents.
1506.5 Agency responsibility.
1506.6 Public involvement.
1506.7 Further guidance.
1506.8 Proposals for legislation.
1506.9 Filing requirements.
1506.10 Timing of agency action.
1506.11 Emergencies.
1506.12 Effective date.
PART 1507—AGENCY COMPLIANCE
1507.1 Compliance.
1507.2 Agency capability to comply.
1507.3 Agency procedures.
PART 1508—TERMINOLOGY AND INDEX
1508.1 Terminology.
1508.2 Act.
A2-2
-------
Sec.
1508.3 Affecting.
1508.4 Categorical exclusion.
1508.5 Cooperating agency.
1508.6 Council.
1508.7 Cumulative Impact.
1508.8 Effects.
1508.9 Environmental assessment.
1508.10 Environmental document.
1508.11 Environmental Impact state-
ment.
1508.12 Federal agency.
1508.13 Finding of no significant
Impact.
1508.14 Human environment.
See.
1508.15 Jurisdiction by law.
1508.16 Lead agency.
1508.17 Legislation.
1508.18 Major Federal action.
1508.19 Matter.
1508.20 Mitigation.
1508.21 NEPA process.
1508.22 Notice of Intent.
1508.23 Proposal.
1508.24 Referring agency.
1508.25 Scope.
1508.26 Special expertise.
1508.27 Significantly.
1508.28 Tiering.
Index.
A2-3
-------
PART 1500—PURPOSE, POLICY, AND
MANDATE
Sec.
1500.1 Purpose.
1500.2 Policy.
1500.3 Mandate.
1500.4 Reducing paperwork.
1500.5 Reducing delay.
1500.6 Agency authority.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et sea.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609) and E.O. 11514, Mar. 5, 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 PR 55990, Nov. 28, 1978, 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, sets
goals (section 101), and provides
means (section 102) for carrying out
the policy. Section 102(2) contains
"action-forcing" provisions to make
sure that federal agencies act accord-
ing to the letter and spirit of the Act.
The regulations that follow implement
section 102(2). Their purpose is to tell
federal agencies what they must do to
comply with the procedures and
achieve 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 officials and citi-
zens before decisions are made and
before actions are taken. The informa-
tion must be of high quality. Accurate
scientific analysis, expert agency com-
ments, and public scrutiny are essen-
tial to implementing NEPA. Most im-
portant, NEPA documents must con-
centrate on the issues that are truly
significant to the action in question,
rather than amassing needless detail.
(c) Ultimately, of course, it is not
better documents but better decisions
that count. NEPA's purpose is not to
generate paperwork—even excellent
paperwork—but 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.
§ 1500.2 Policy.
Federal agencies shall to the fullest
extent possible:
(a) 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.
(b) Implement procedures to make
the NEPA process more useful to deci-
sionmakers 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.
(d) Encourage and facilitate public
involvement in decisions which affect
the quality of the human environ-
ment.
(e) Use the NEPA process to identify
and assess the reasonable alternatives
to proposed actions that will avoid or
minimize adverse effects of these ac-
tions upon the quality of the human
environment.
(f) Use all practicable means, con-
sistent with the requirements of the
Act and other essential considerations
of national policy, to restore and en-
hance the quality of the human envi-
ronment and avoid or minimize any
possible adverse effects of their ac-
tions upon the quality of the human
environment.
§ 1500.3 Mandate.
Parts 1500 through 1508 of this title
provide regulations applicable to and
binding on all Federal agencies for im-
plementing the procedural provisions
A2-4
-------
of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, as amended (Pub. L. 91-
190, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA or
the Act) except where compliance
would be inconsistent with other stat-
utory requirements. These regulations
are issued pursuant to NEPA, the En-
vironmental Quality Improvement Act
of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et
seq.) section 309 of the Clean Air Act,
as amended (42 U:S.C. 7609) and Exec-
utive Order 11514, Protection and En-
hancement of Environmental Quality
(March 5, 1970, as amended by Execu-
tive Order 11991, May 24, 1977). These
regulations, unlike the predecessor
guidelines, are not confined to sec.
102(2)(C) (environmental Impact state-
ments). The regulations apply to the
whole of section 102(2). The provisions
of the Act and of these regulations
must be read together as a whole in
order to comply with the spirit and
letter of the law. It is the Council's in-
tention that Judicial review of agency
compliance with these regulations not
occur before an agency has filed the
final environmental impact statement,
or has made a final finding of no sig-
nificant impact (when such a finding
will result in action affecting the envi-
ronment), or takes action that will
result in irreparable injury. Further-
more, it is the Council's intention that
any trivial violation of these regula-
tions not give rise to any independent
cause of action.
§ 1500.4 Reducing paperwork.
Agencies shall reduce excessive pa-
perwork by:
(a) Reducing the length of environ-
mental impact statements
(§ 1502.2(c)), by means such as setting
appropriate page limits
(§§ 1501.7(b)(1) and 1502.7).
(b) Preparing analytic rather than
encyclopedic environmental impact
statements (§ 1502.2(a)).
(c) Discussing only briefly issues
other than significant ones
(§ 1502.2(b)).
(d) Writing environmental impact
statements in plain language
(§ 1502.8).
(e) Following a clear format for envi-
ronmental impact statements
(§ 1502.10).
(f) Emphasizing the portions of the
environmental impact statement that
are useful to decisionmakers and the
public (§§ 1502.14 and 1502.15) and re-
ducing emphasis on background mate-
rial (§ 1502.16).
(g) Using the scoping process, not
only to identify significant environ-
mental issues deserving of study, but
also to deemphasize insignificant
issues, narrowing the scope of the en-
vironmental impact statement process
accordingly (8 1501.7).
(h) Summarizing the environmental
Impact statement (5 1502.12) .and cir-
culating the summary Instead of the
entire environmental impact state-
ment if the latter is unusually long
(5 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 (§§ 1502.4 and 1502.20).
(J) Incorporating by reference
(§ 1502.21).
(k) Integrating NEPA requirements
with other environmental review and
consultation requirements (§ 1502.25).
(1) Requiring comments to be as spe-
cific as possible (§ 1503.3).
(m) Attaching and circulating only
changes to the draft environmental
impact statement, rather than rewrit-
ing and circulating the entire state-
ment when changes are minor
(§ 1503.4(c)).
(n) Eliminating duplication with
State and local procedures, by provid-
ing for joint preparation (§ 1506.2),
and with other Federal procedures, by
providing that an agency may adopt
appropriate environmental documents
prepared by another agency (§ 1506.3).
(o) Combining environmental docu-
ments with other documents
(§ 1506.4).
(p) Using categorical exclusions to
define categories of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human envi-
ronment and which are therefore
exempt from requirements to prepare
an environmental impact statement
(§ 1508.4).
(q) Using a finding of no significant
impact when an action not otherwise
excluded will not have a significant
A2-5
-------
effect on the human environment and
is therefore exempt from require-
ments to prepare an environmental
impact statement (§ 1508.13).
[43 FR 55990. Nov. 29. 1978; 44 FR 873, Jan.
3. 1979]
§ 1500.5 Reducing delay.
Agencies shall reduce delay by:
(a) Integrating the NEPA process
into early planning (§ 1501.2).
(b) Emphasizing interagency coop-
eration before the environmental
impact statement Is prepared, rather
than submission of adversary com-
ments on a completed document
(§ 1501.6).
(c) Insuring the swift and fair reso-
lution of lead agency disputes
(§ 1501.5).
(d) Using the scoping process for an
early identification of what are and
what are not the real issues (§ 1501.7).
(e) Establishing appropriate time
limits for the environmental impact
statement process (§§ 1501.7(b)(2) and
1501.8).
(f) Preparing environmental impact
statements early in the process
(§ 1502.5).
(g) Integrating NEPA requirements
with other environmental review and
consultation requirements (§ 1502.25).
(h) Eliminating duplication with
State and local procedures by provid-
ing for joint preparation (§ 1506.2) and
with other Federal procedures by pro-
viding that an agency may adopt ap-
propriate environmental documents
prepared by another agency (§ 1506.3).
(i) Combining environmental docu-
ments with other documents
(§ 1506.4).
(j) Using accelerated procedures for
proposals for legislation (§ 1506.8).
(k) Using categorical exclusions to
define categories of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human envi-
ronment (§ 1508.4) and which are
therefore exempt from requirements
to prepare an environmental impact
statement.
(1) 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.
8 1500.6 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 purposes and pro-
visions of the Act. The phrase "to the
fullest extent possible" in section 102
means that each agency of the Federal
Government shall comply with that
section unless existing law applicable
to the agency's operations expressly
prohibits or makes compliance Impos-
sible.
PART 1501— NEPA AND AGENCY
PLANNING
Sec.
1501.1 Purpose.
1501.2 Apply NEPA early in the process.
1501.3 When to prepare an environmental
assessment.
1501.4 Whether to prepare an environmen-
tal impact statement.
1501.5 Lead agencies.
1501.6 Cooperating agencies.
1501.7 Scoping.
1501.8 Time limits.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609, and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 55992, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1501.1 Purpose.
The purposes of this part include:
(a) Integrating the NEPA process
Into early planning to Insure appropri-
ate consideration of NEPA's policies
and to eliminate delay.
(b) Emphasizing cooperative consul-
tation among agencies before the envi-
ronmental impact statement is pre-
pared rather than submission of ad-
versary comments on a completed doc-
ument.
A2-6
-------
(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 deemphasizing 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.
8 1501.2 Apply NEPA early in the process.
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(2)(A) 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
decisionmaking which may have an
impact on man's environment," as
specified by § 1507.2.
(b) Identify environmental effects
and values in adequate detail so they
can be compared to economic and
technical analyses. Environmental
documents and appropriate analyses
shall be circulated and reviewed at the
same time as other planning docu-
ments.
(c) Study, develop, and describe ap-
propriate alternatives to recommended
courses of action in any proposal
which involves unresolved conflicts
concerning alternative uses of avail-
able resources as provided by section
102(2)(E) of the Act.
(d) Provide for cases where actions
are planned by private applicants or
other non-Federal entities before Fed-
eral involvement so that:
(1) 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.
§ 1501.3 When to prepare an environmen-
tal assessment
(a) Agencies shall prepare an envi-
ronmental assessment (§ 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 decisionmaking.
§ 1501.4 Whether to prepare an environ-
mental impact statement.
In determining whether to prepare
an environmental impact statement
the Federal agency shall:
(a) Determine under its procedures
supplementing these regulations (de-
scribed in § 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
(§ 1508.9). The agency shall involve en-
vironmental agencies, applicants, and
the public, to the extent practicable,
in preparing assessments required by
§ 1508.9(a)(1).
(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.
(1) The agency shall make the find-
ing of no significant impact available
A2-7
-------
to the affected public as specified in
§ 1506.6.
(2) In certain limited circumstances,
which the agency may cover in its pro-
cedures under § 1507.3, the agency
shall make the finding of no signifi-
cant impact available for public review
(including State and areawide 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 § 1507.3, or
(ii) The nature of the proposed
action is one without precedent.
§ 1501.5 Lead agencies.
(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.
(b) 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 in 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
agencies 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 lead
agency designation, any of the agen-
cies or persons concerned may file a
request with the Council asking It to
determine which Federal agency shall
be the lead agency.
A copy of the request shall be trans-
mitted to each potential lead agency.
The request shall consist of:
(1) A precise description of the
nature and extent of the proposed
action.
(2) A detailed statement of why each
potential lead agency should or should
not be the lead agency under the crite-
ria specified in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(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.
[43 FR 55992. Nov. 29, 1978; 44 FR 873, Jan.
3, 1979]
§ 1501.6 Cooperating agencies.
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-
A2-8
-------
quest the lead agency to designate It a
cooperating agency.
(a) The lead agency shall:
(1) Request the participation of each
cooperating agency in the NEPA proc-
ess at the earliest possible time.
(2) Use the environmental analysis
and proposals of cooperating agencies
with jurisdiction by law or special ex-
pertise, to the maximum extent possi-
ble consistent with its responsibility as
lead agency.
(3) Meet with a cooperating agency
at the latter's 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 § 1501.7).
(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
the lead agency's request to enhance
the latter's interdisciplinary capabil-
ity.
(5) Normally use its own funds. The
lead agency shall, to the extent avail-
able funds permit, fund those major
activities or analyses it requests from
cooperating agencies. Potential lead
agencies shall include such funding re-
quirements in their budget requests.
(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 intent
(§ 1508.22) in the Federal Register
except as provided in § 1507.3(e).
(a) As part of the scoping process
the lead agency shall:
(1) 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 § 1507.3(c). An
agency may give notice in accordance
with § 1506.6.
(2) Determine the scope (§ 1508.25)
and the significant issues to be ana-
lyzed in depth in the environmental
impact statement.
(3) Identify and eliminate from de-
tailed study the issues which are not
significant or which have been covered
by prior environmental review
(§ 1506.3), narrowing the discussion of
these issues in the statement to a brief
presentation of why they will not have
a significant effect on the human envi-
ronment or providing a reference to
their coverage elsewhere.
(4) Allocate assignments for prepara-
tion of the environmental impact
statement among the lead and cooper-
ating agencies, with the lead agency
retaining responsibility for the state-
ment.
(5) Indicate any public environmen-
tal assessments and other environmen-
tal impact statements which are being
or will be prepared that are related to
but are not part of the scope of the
impact statement under consideration.
(6) Identify other environmental
review and consultation requirements
so the lead and cooperating agencies
may prepare other required analyses
and studies concurrently with, and in-
tegrated with, the environmental
impact statement as provided in
§ 1502.25.
(7) Indicate the relationship between
the timing of the preparation of envi-
ronmental analyses and the agency's
tentative planning and decisionmaking
schedule.
(b) As part of the scoping process
the lead agency may:
(1) Set page limits on environmental
documents (§ 1502.7).
A2-9
-------
§ 1501.8
40 CFR Ch. V (7-1-86 Edition)
(2) Set time limits (§ 1501.8).
(3) Adopt procedures under § 1507.3
to combine its environmental assess-
ment process with its scoping process.
(4) Hold an early scoping 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 (a)
and (b) of this section if substantial
changes are made later in the pro-
posed action, or if significant new cir-
cumstances or information arise which
bear on the proposal or its impacts.
§ 1501.8 Time limits.
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 time limits appropriate
to individual actions (consistent with
the time intervals required by
§ 1506.10). When multiple agencies are
involved the reference to agency below
means lead agency.
(a) 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.
(b) The agency may:
(1) Consider the following factors in
determining time limits:
(i) Potential for environmental
harm.
(ii) Size of the proposed action.
(iii) 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.
(vi) Decree to which relevant infor-
mation is known and if not known the
time required for obtaining it.
(vn) Degree to which the action is
controversial.
(viii) Other time limits imposed on
the agency by law, regulations, or ex-
ecutive order.
(2) Set overall time limits or limits
for each constituent part of the NEPA
process, which may include:
(i) Decision on whether to prepare
an environmental impact statement (if
not already decided).
(ii) Determination of the scope of
the environmental impact statement.
(iii) Preparation of the draft envi-
ronmental impact statement.
(iv) Review of any comments on the
draft environmental impact statement
from the public and agencies.
(v) Preparation of the final environ-
mental impact statement.
(vi) Review of any comments on cne
final environmental impact statement.
(vii) Decision on the action based in
part on the environmental impact
statement.
(3) Designate a person (such as the
project manager or a person in the
agency's office with NEPA responsibil-
ities) to expedite the NEPA process.
(c) State or local agencies or mem-
bers of the public may request a Fed-
eral Agency to set time limits
PART 1502—ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT
Sec.
1502.1 Purpose.
1502.2 Implementation.
1502.3 Statutory requirements for state-
ments.
1502.4 Major Federal actions requiring the
preparation of environmental impact
statements.
1502.5 Timing.
1502.6 Interdisciplinary preparation.
1502.7 Page limits.
1502.8 Writing.
1502.9 Draft, final, and supplemental state-
ments.
1502.10 Recommended format.
1502.11 Cover sheet.
1502.12 Summary.
1502.13 Purpose and need.
1502.14 Alternatives including the pro-
posed action.
1502.15 Affected environment.
1502.16 Environmental consequences.
1502.17 List of preparers.
1502.18 Appendix.
1502.19 Circulation of the environmental
impact statement.
1502.20 Tiering.
1502.21 Incorporation by reference.
1502.22 Incomplete or unavailable informa-
tion.
A2-10
-------
Sec.
1502.23 Cost-benefit analysis.
1502.24 Methodology and scientific accura-
cy.
1502.25 Environmental review and consul-
tation requirements.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seg.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5. 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 55994, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1502.1 Purpose.
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. It shall be used by
Federal officials in conjunction with
other relevant material to plan actions
and make decisions.
§ 1502.2 Implementation.
To achieve the purposes set forth in
§ 1502.1 agencies shall prepare envi-
ronmental impact statements in the
following manner:
(a) Environmental impact state-
ments shall be analytic rather than
encyclopedic.
(b) 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.
(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.
(d) Environmental impact state-
ments shall state 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
decisionmaker.
(f) Agencies shall not commit re-
sources prejudicing selection of alter-
natives before making a final decision
(§ 1506.1).
(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.
§ 1502.3 Statutory requirements for state-
ments.
As required by sec. 102(2)(C) of
NEPA environmental impact state-
ments (§ 1508.11) are to be included in
every recommendation or report.
On proposals (§ 1508.23).
For legislation and (§ 1508.17).
Other major Federal actions
(§ 1508.18).
Significantly (§ 1508.27).
Affecting (§§ 1508.3, 1508.8).
The quality of the human environ-
ment (§ 1508.14).
§ 1502.4 Major Federal actions requiring
the preparation of environmental
impact statements.
(a) Agencies shall make sure the pro-
posal which is the subject of an envi-
ronmental impact statement is proper-
ly defined. Agencies shall use the cri-
teria for scope (§ 1508.25) to determine
which proposal(s) 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
A2-11
-------
be evaluated in a single impact state-
ment.
(b) Environmental impact state-
ments may be prepared, and are some-
times required, for broad Federal ac-
tions such as the adoption of new
agency programs or regulations
(§ 1508.18). Agencies shall prepare
statements on broad actions so that
they are relevant to policy and are
timed to coincide with meaningful
points in agency planning and deci-
sionmaking.
(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) Generically, 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
(§ 1502.20), and other methods iTsted
in §§ 1500.4 and 1500.5 to relate broad
and narrow actions and to avoid dupli-
cation and delay.
§ 1502.5 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
Ln 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 decisionmaking proc-
ess and will not be used to rationalize
or justify decisions already made
(§§ 1500.2(c), 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 rulemaking the
draft environmental impact statement
shall normally accompany the pro-
posed rule.
§ 1502.6 Interdisciplinary preparation.
Environmental impact statements
shall be prepared using an inter-disci-
plinary approach which will insure the
integrated use of the natural and
social sciences and the environmental
design arts (section 102(2)(A) of the
Act). The disciplines of the preparers
shall be appropriate to the scope and
issues identified in the scoping process
(§ 1501.7).
§ 1502.7 Page limits.
The text of final environmental
impact statements (e.g., paragraphs
(d) through (g) of § 1502.10) shall nor-
mally be less than 150 pages and for
proposals of unusual scope or com-
plexity shall normally be less than 300
pages.
A2-12
-------
8 1502.8 Writing.
Environmental impact statements
shall be written In plain language and
may use appropriate graphics so that
decisionmakers 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.
§ 1502.9 Draft, final, and supplemental
statements.
Except for proposals for legislation
as provided in § 1506.8 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
102(2)(C) of the Act. If a draft state-
ment is so inadequate as to preclude
meaningful analysis, the agency shall
prepare and circulate a revised draft
of the appropriate portion. The
agency shall make every effort to dis-
close and discuss at appropriate points
in the draft statement all major points
of view on the environmental impacts
of the alternatives including the pro-
posed action.
(b) Final environmental impact
statements shall respond to comments
as required in Part 1503 of this chap-
ter. The agency shall discuss at appro-
priate points in the final statement
any responsible opposing view which
was not adequately discussed in the
draft statement and shall indicate the
agency's response to the issues raised.
(c) Agencies:
(1) Shall prepare supplements to
either draft or final environmental
impact statements if:
(i) The agency makes substantial
changes in the proposed action that
are relevant to environmental con-
cerns; or
(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
exists.
(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.
§ 1502.10 Recommended format.
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 for 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 contents.
(d) Purpose of and need for action.
(e) Alternatives including proposed
action (sections 102(2)(C)(iii) and
102(2)(E) of the Act).
(f) Affected environment.
(g) Environmental consequences (es-
pecially sections 102(2)(C) (i). (ii), (iv),
and (v) of the Act).
(h) List of preparers.
(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 §§ 1502.11
through 1502.18, in any appropriate
format.
A2-13
-------
§ 1502.11 Cover sheet.
The cover sheet shall not exceed one
page. It shall include:
(a) A list of the responsible agencies
including the lead agency and any co-
operating agencies.
(b) The title of the proposed action
that is the subject of the statement
(and if appropriate the titles of related
cooperating agency actions), together
with the State(s) and county(ies) (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.
(f) The date by which comments
must be received (computed in coop-
eration with EPA under § 1506.10).
The information required by this sec-
tion may be entered on Standard
Form 424 (in items 4, 6, 7, 10, and 18).
§ 1502.12 Summary.
Each environmental impact state-
ment shall contain a summary which
adequately and accurately summarizes
the statement. The summary shall
stress the major conclusions, areas of
controversy (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 15
pages.
§ 1502.13 Purpose and need.
The statement shall briefly specify
the underlying purpose and need to
which the agency is responding in pro-
posing the alternatives including the
proposed action.
§ 1502.14 Alternatives 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 (§ 1502.15) and the Environ-
mental Consequences (§ 1502.16), it
should present the environmental im-
pacts of the proposal and the alterna-
tives in comparative form, thus sharp-
ly defining the issues and providing a
clear basis for choice among options
by the decisionmaker 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.
§ 1502.16 Environmental consequences.
This section forms the scientific and
analytic basis for the comparisons
under § 1502.14. It shall consolidate
A2-14
-------
the discussions of those elements re-
quired by sections 102(2)(C) (i), (ii),
(iv), and (v) of NEPA which are within
the scope of the statement and as
much of section 102(2)(C)(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
§ 1502.14. It shall include discussions
of:
(a) Direct effects and their signifi-
cance (§ 1508.8).
(b) Indirect effects and their signifi-
cance (§ 1508.8).
(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
§ 1506.2(d).)
(d) The environmental effects of al-
ternatives including the proposed
action. The comparisons under
§ 1502.14 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.
(h) Means to mitigate adverse envi-
ronmental impacts (if not fully cov-
ered under § 1502.14(f)).
[43 FR 55994, Nov. 29, 1978; 44 PR 873, Jan.
3. 1979]
§ 1502.17 List of preparers.
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
(§§ 1502.6 and 1502.8). Where possible
the persons who are responsible for a
particular analysis, including analyses
in background papers, shall be identi-
fied. Normally the list will not exceed
two pages.
8 1502.18 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
(§ 1502.21)).
(b) 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.
§ 1502.19 Circulation of the environmental
impact statement.
Agencies shall circulate the entire
draft and final environmental impact
statements except for certain appendi-
ces as provided in § 1502.18(d) and un-
changed statements as provided in
§ 1503.4(c). However, if the statement
is unusually long, the agency may cir-
culate the summary instead, except
that the entire statement shall be fur-
nished to:
(a) Any Federal agency which has
jurisdiction by law or special expertise
with respect to any environmental
impact involved and any appropriate
Federal, State or local agency author-
ized to develop and enforce environ-
mental standards.
(b) The applicant, if any.
(c) Any person, organization, or
agency requesting the entire environ-
mental impact statement.
(d) In the case of a final environ-
mental impact statement any person,
A2-15
-------
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.
§ 1502.20 Tiering.
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 state where the
earlier document is available. Tiering
may also be appropriate for different
stages of actions. (Section 1508.28).
§ 1502.21 Incorporation by reference.
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.
§ 1502.22 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 costs 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 impacts 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
their 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 Federal Register on or after
May 27, 1986. For environmental
impact statements in progress, agen-
cies may choose to comply with the re-
A2-16
-------
quirements of either the original or
amended regulation.
[51 FR 15625, Apr. 25. 1986]
§ 1502.23 Cost-benefit analysis.
If a cost-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 consequences.
To assess the adequacy of compliance
with section 102(2)(B) of the Act the
statement shall, when a cost-benefit
analysis is prepared, discuss the rela-
tionship between that analysis and
any analyses of unquantified environ-
mental impacts, values, and amenities.
For purposes of complying with the
Act, the weighing of the merits and
drawbacks of the various alternatives
need not be displayed in a monetary
cost-benefit analysis 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 factors not related to environ-
mental quality, which are likely to be
relevant and important to a decision.
§ 1502.24 Methodology and scientific accu-
racy.
Agencies shall insure the profession-
al integrity, including scientific integ-
rity, of the discussions and analyses in
environmental impact statements.
They shall identify any methodologies
used and shall make explicit reference
by footnote to the scientific and other
sources relied upon for conclusions in
the statement. An agency may place
discussion of methodology in an ap-
pendix.
§ 1502.25 Environmental review and con-
sultation requirements.
(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
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16
U.S.C. 661 et seq.), the National His-
toric Preservation Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 470 et seq.), the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), and other environmental review
laws and executive orders.
(b) The draft environmental impact
statement shall list all Federal per-
mits, licenses, and other entitlements
which must be obtained in implement-
ing the proposal. If it is uncertain
whether a Federal permit, license, or
other entitlement is necessary, the
draft environmental impact statement
shall so indicate.
PART 1503—COMMENTING
Sec.
1503.1 Inviting comments.
1503.2 Duty to comment.
1503.3 Specificity of comments.
1503.4 Response to comments.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act. as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5. 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 55997, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1503.1 Inviting comments.
(a) After preparing a draft environ-
mental impact statement and before
preparing a final environmental
impact statement the agency shall:
(1) Obtain the comments 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 environmental standards.
(2) Request the comments of:
(i) Appropriate State and local agen-
cies which are authorized to develop
and enforce environmental standards;
(ii) Indian tribes, when the effects
may be on a reservation; and
(iii) Any agency which has requested
that it receive statements on actions of
the kind proposed.
Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-95 (Revised), through its
system of clearinghouses, provides a
means of securing the views of State
and local environmental agencies. The
clearinghouses may be used, by
mutual agreement of the lead agency
and the clearinghouse, for securing
A2-17
-------
State 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 § 1506.10.
§ 1503.2 Duty to 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 § 1506.10. 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.
§ 1503.3 Specificity of comments.
(a) Comments on an environmental
impact statement or on a proposed
action shall be as specific as possible
and may address either the adequacy
of the statement or the merits of the
alternatives discussed or both.
(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 it needs to comment adequately
on the draft statement's analysis of
significant site-specific effects associ-
ated with the granting or approving
by that cooperating agency of neces-
sary Federal permits, licenses, or enti-
tlements.
(d) When a cooperating agency with
jurisdiction by law objects to or ex-
presses reservations about the propos-
al on grounds of environmental im-
pacts, the agency expressing the objec-
tion or reservation shall specify the
mitigation measures it considers neces-
sary to allow the agency to grant or
approve applicable permit, license, or
related requirements or concurrences.
§ 1503.4 Response to comments.
(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
its analyses.
(4) Make factual corrections.
(5) 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 changes in response to com-
ments are minor and are confined to
the responses described in paragraphs
(a) (4) and (5) 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
(§ 1502.19). The entire document with
A2-18
-------
a new cover sheet shall be filed as the
final statement (§ 1506.9).
PART 1504—PREDECISION REFER-
RALS TO THE COUNCIL OF PRO-
POSED FEDERAL ACTIONS DETER-
MINED TO BE ENVIRONMENTALLY
UNSATISFACTORY
Sec.
1504.1 Purpose.
1504.2 Criteria for referral.
1504.3 Procedure for referrals and re-
sponse.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seg.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 55998, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1504.1 Purpose.
(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 309 of the Clean
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7609), 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(2)(C) 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.
§ 150-1.2 Criteria for referral.
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 impacts, con-
sidering:
(a) Possible violation of national en-
vironmental standards or policies.
(b) Severity.
(c) Geographical scope.
(d) Duration.
(e) Importance as precedents.
(f) Availability of environmentally
preferable alternatives.
§ 1504.3 Procedure for referrals and re-
sponse.
(a) A Federal agency making the re-
ferral to the Council shall:
(1) 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 draft
environmental impact statement,
except when the statement does not
contain adequate information to
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 time.
(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 (25) days after 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 referral shall consist of:
(1)A copy of the letter signed by the
head of the referring agency and deliv-
ered to the lead agency informing the
lead agency of the referral and the
reasons for it, and requesting that no
action be taken to implement the
matter until the Council acts upon the
A2-19
-------
referral. The letter shall include a
copy of the statement referred to in
(c)(2) of this section.
(2) A statement supported by factual
evidence leading to the conclusion
that the matter is unsatisfactory from
the standpoint of public health or wel-
fare or environmental quality. The
statement shall:
(i) Identify any material facts in
controversy and incorporate (by refer-
ence if appropriate) agreed upon facts,
(ii) Identify any existing environ-
mental requirements or policies which
would be violated by the matter,
(iii) 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
(vi) Give the referring agency's rec-
ommendations 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.
(3) 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 will be no response
(unless the lead agency agrees to a
longer time), the Council may take
one or more of the following actions:
(1) Conclude that the process of re-
ferral and response has successfully
resolved the problem.
(2) Initiate discussions with the
agencies with the objective of media-
tion with referring and lead agencies.
(3) Hold public meetings or hearings
to obtain additional views and infor-
mation.
(4) 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-
agreements are irreconcilable.
(6) Publish its findings and recom-
mendations (including where appropri-
ate a finding that the submitted evi-
dence does 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 (f) (2), (3), or
(5) 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 5 U.S.C. 557(d) (Administrative
Procedure Act).
[43 PR 55998, Nov. 29. 1978; 44 FR 873, Jan.
3, 1979]
PART 1505—NEPA AND AGENCY
DECISIONMAKING
Sec.
1505.1 Agency decisionmaking procedures.
1505.2 Record of decision in cases requiring
environmental impact statements.
1505.3 Implementing the decision.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et sea), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act. as amended (42 U.S.C.
A2-20
-------
7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5. 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 55999, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1505.1 Agency decisionmaking proce-
dures.
Agencies shall adopt procedures
(§ 1507.3) to ensure that decisions are
made in accordance with the policies
and purposes of the Act. Such proce-
dures shall include but not be limited
to:
(a) Implementing procedures under
section 102(2) to achieve the require-
ments of sections 101 and 102(1).
(b) Designating the major decision
points for the agency's principal pro-
grams likely to have a significant
effect on the human environment and
assuring that the NEPA process corre-
sponds with them.
(c) Requiring that relevant environ-
mental documents, comments, and re-
sponses be part of the record in formal
rulemaking or adjudicatory proceed-
ings.
(d) Requiring that relevant environ-
mental documents, comments, and re-
sponses accompany the proposal
through existing agency review proc-
esses so that agency officials use the
statement in making decisions.
(e) Requiring that the alternatives
considered by the decisionmaker are
encompassed by the range of alterna-
tives discussed in the relevant environ-
mental documents and that the deci-
sionmaker consider the alternatives
described in the environmental impact
statement. If another decision docu-
ment accompanies the relevant envi-
ronmental documents to the decision-
maker, agencies are encouraged to
make available to the public before
the decision is made any part of that
document that relates to the compari-
son of alternatives.
§ 1505.2 Record of decision in cases re-
quiring environmental impact state-
ments.
At the time of its decision (§ 1506.10)
or, if appropriate, its recommendation
to Congress, each agency shall prepare
a concise pubiic record of decision.
The record, which may be integrated
into any other record prepared by the
agency, including that required by
OMB Circular A-95 (Revised), part I,
sections 6 (c) and (d), and part II, sec-
tion 5(b)(4), shall:
(a) State what the decision was.
(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 how those considerations entered
into its decision.
(c) 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.
§ 1505.3 Implementing the decision.
Agencies may provide for monitoring
to assure that their decisions are car-
ried out and should c}o so in important
cases. Mitigation (§ 1505.2(c)) 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, permits 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 and which
were adopted by the agency making
the decision.
(d) Upon request, make available to
the public the results of relevant mon-
itoring.
A2-21
-------
PART 1506—OTHER REQUIREMENTS
OF NEPA
Sec.
1506.1 Limitations on actions during NEPA
process.
1506.2 Elimination of duplication with
State and local procedures.
1506.3 Adoption.
1506.4 Combining documents.
1506.5 Agency responsibility.
1506.6 Public involvement.
1506.7 Further guidance.
1506.8 Proposals for legislation.
1506.9 Filing requirements.
1506.10 Timing of agency action.
1506.11 Emergencies.
1506.12 Effective date.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609). and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 56000, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1506.1 Limitations on actions during
NEPA process.
(a) Until an agency issues a record of
decision as provided in § 1505.2 (except
as provided in paragraph (c) of this
section), no action concerning the pro-
posal shall be taken which would:
(1) Have an adverse environmental
impact; or
(2) Limit the choice of reasonable al-
ternatives.
(b) If any agency is considering an
application from a non-Federal entity,
and is aware that the applicant is
about to take an action within the
agency's jurisdiction that would meet
either of the criteria in paragraph (a)
of this section, then the agency shall
promptly notify the applicant that the
agency will 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 is not cov-
ered by an existing program state-
ment, agencies shall not undertake in
the interim any major Federal action
covered by the program which may
significantly affect the quality of the
human environment unless such
action:
(1) Is justified independently of the
program;
(2) Is itself accompanied by an ade-
quate environmental impact state-
ment; and
(3) Will not prejudice the ultimate
decision on the program. Interim
action prejudices the ultimate decision
on the program when it tends to deter-
mine subsequent development or limit
alternatives.
(d) This section does not preclude
development by applicants of plans or
designs or performance of other work
necessary to support an application
for Federal, State or local permits or
assistance. Nothing in this section
shall preclude Rural Electrification
Administration approval of minimal
expenditures not affecting the envi-
ronment (.e.g. long leadtime equipment
and purchase options) made by non-
governmental entities seeking loan
guarantees from the Administration.
§ 1506.2 Elimination of duplication with
State and local procedures.
(a) Agencies authorized by law to co-
operate with State agencies of state-
wide jurisdiction pursuant to section
102(2)(D) of the Act may do so.
(b) Agencies shall cooperate with
State and local agencies to the fullest
extent possible to reduce duplication
between NEPA and State and local re-
quirements, 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.
(2) 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 requirements, unless the
agencies are specifically barred from
doing so by some other law. Except for
cases covered by paragraph (a) of this
section, such cooperation shall to the
fullest extent possible include joint en-
vironmental impact statements. In
A2-22
-------
such cases one or more Federal agen-
cies and one or more State 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 with those in NEPA, Federal
agencies shall cooperate in fulfilling
these requirements as well as those of
Federal laws so that one document
will comply with all applicable laws.
(d) To better integrate 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.
§ 1506.3 Adoption.
(a) 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 recirculate it except as a
final statement. Otherwise the adopt-
ing agency shall treat the statement as
a draft and recirculate it (except as
provided in paragraph (c) of this sec-
tion).
(c) A cooperating agency may adopt
without recirculating the environmen-
tal impact statement of a lead agency
when, after an independent review of
the statement, the cooperating agency
concludes that its comments and sug-
gestions have been satisfied.
(d) When an agency adopts a state-
ment which is not final within the
agency that prepared it, or when the
action it assesses is the subject of a re-
ferral under Part 1504, or when the
statement's adequacy is the subject of
a judicial action which is not final, the
agency shall so specify.
§ 1506.4 Combining documents.
Any environmental document in
compliance with NEPA may be com-
bined with any other agency docu-
ment to reduce duplication and paper-
work.
§ 1506.5 Agency responsibility.
(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 its 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 (§ 1502.17). It is the intent of this
paragraph that acceptable work not be
redone, but that it be verified by the
agency.
(b) Environmental assessments. If
an agency permits an applicant to pre-
pare an environmental assessment, the
agency, besides fulfilling the require-
ments of paragraph (a) of this section,
shall make its own evaluation of the
environmental issues and take respon-
sibility for the scope and content of
the environmental assessment.
(c) Environmental impact state-
ments. Except as provided in §§ 1506.2
and 1506.3 any environmental impact
statement prepared pursuant to the
requirements of NEPA shall be pre-
pared directly by or by a contractor se-
lected by the lead agency or where ap-
propriate under § 1501.6(b), a cooper-
ating agency. It is the intent of these
regulations that the contractor be
chosen solely by the lead agency, or by
the lead agency in cooperation with
cooperating agencies, or where appro-
priate by a cooperating agency to
avoid any conflict of interest. Contrac-
tors shall execute a disclosure state-
ment prepared by the lead agency, or
where appropriate the cooperating
agency, specifying that they have no
financial or other interest in the out-
A2-23
-------
come of the project. If the document
is prepared by contract, the responsi-
ble Federal official shall furnish guid-
ance and participate in the prepara-
tion and shall independently evaluate
the statement prior to its approval and
take responsibility for its 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.
§ 1506.6 Public involvement.
Agencies shall:
(a) Make diligent efforts to involve
the public in preparing and imple-
menting their NEPA procedures.
(b) Provide public notice of NEPA-
related hearings, public meetings, and
the availability of environmental docu-
ments so as to inform those persons
and agencies who may be interested or
affected.
(1) In all cases the agency shall mail
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 Federal
Register 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 rulemaking may
provide notice by mail 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 areawide
clearinghouses pursuant to OMB Cir-
cular A-95 (Revised).
(ii) Notice to Indian tribes when ef-
fects may occur on reservations.
(iii) Following the affected State'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.
(vi) Notice to potentially interested
community organizations including
small business associations.
(vii) Publication in newsletters that
may be expected to reach potentially
interested persons.
(viii) Direct mailing to owners and
occupants of nearby or affected prop-
erty.
(ix) Posting of notice on and off 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 15 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-
visions of the Freedom of Information
Act (5 U.S.C. 552), without regard to
the exclusion for interagency memo-
randa where such memoranda trans-
mit comments of Federal agencies 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 to
other Federal agencies, including the
Council.
A2-24
-------
§ 1506.7 Further guidance.
The Council may provide further
guidance concerning NEPA and its
procedures including:
(a) A handbook which the Council
may supplement from time to time,
which shall in plain language provide
guidance and 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.
§ 1506.8 Proposals for legislation.
(a) The NEPA process for proposals
for legislation (§ 1508.17) 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-
mittal of a legislative proposal to Con-
gress; however, it may be transmitted
to Congress up to 30 days later in
order to allow time for completion of
an accurate statement which can serve
as the basis for public and Congres-
sional debate. The statement must be
available in time for Congressional
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
proposal shall be prepared and circu-
lated as provided by §§ 1503.1 and
1506.10.
(i) A Congressional Committee with
jurisdiction over the proposal has a
rule requiring both draft and final en-
vironmental impact statements.
(ii) The proposal results from a
study process required by statute
(such as those required by the Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1271
et seq.) and the Wilderness Act (16
U.S.C. 1131 et seq.)).
(iii) 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 11(b) Report
of Building Project Surveys to the
Congress, and a final statement shall
be completed before site acquisition.
(iv) The agency decides to prepare
draft and final statements.
(c) Comments on the legislative
statement shall be given to the lead
agency which shall forward them
along with its own responses to the
Congressional committees with juris-
diction.
§ 1506.9 Filing requirements.
Environmental impact statements
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. 20460.
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 its responsibil-
ities under this section and § 1506.10.
§ 1506.10 Timing of agency action.
(a) The Environmental Protection
Agency shall publish a notice in the
Federal Register each week of the en-
vironmental impact statements filed
A2-25
-------
during the preceding week. The mini-
mum time periods set forth in this sec-
tion shall be calculated from the date
of publication of this notice.
(b) No decision on the proposed
action shall be made or recorded
under § 1505.2 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 rules 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 may be
made and recorded at the same time
the environmental impact statement is
published. This means that the period
for appeal of the decision and the 30-
day period prescribed in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section may run concur-
rently. In such cases the environmen-
tal impact statement shall explain the
timing and the public's right of
appeal. An agency engaged in rule-
making under the Administrative Pro-
cedure Act or other statute for the
purpose of protecting the public
health or safety, may waive the time
period in paragraph (b)(2) 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. (Also see § 1507.3(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.
[43 FR 56000, Nov. 29. 1978; 44 FR 874, Jan.
3. 1979]
§ 1506.11 Emergencies.
Where emergency circumstances
make it necessary to take an action
with significant environmental impact
without observing the provisions of
these regulations, the Federal agency
taking the action should consult with
the Council about alternative arrange-
ments. Agencies and the Council will
limit such arrangements to actions
necessary to control the immediate im-
pacts of the emergency. Other actions
remain subject to NEPA review.
§ 1506.12 Effective date.
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
filed before the effective date of these
A2-26
-------
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 Register 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.
PART 1507—AGENCY COMPLIANCE
Sec.
1507.1 Compliance.
1507.2 Agency capability to comply.
1507.3 Agency procedures.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 56002, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
§ 1507.1 Compliance.
All agencies of the Federal Govern-
ment shall comply with these regula-
tions. It is the intent of these regula-
tions to allow each agency flexibility
in adapting its implementing proce-
dures authorized by § 1507.3 to the re-
quirements of other applicable laws.
§ 1507.2 Agency capability to comply.
Each agency shall be capable (in
terms of personnel and other re-
sources) of complying with the re-
quirements enumerated below. Such
compliance may include use of other's
resources, but the using agency shall
itself have sufficient capability to
evaluate what others do for it. Agen-
cies shall:
(a) Fulfill the requirements of sec-
tion 102(2)(A) 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 decisionmaking which may
have an impact on the human environ-
ment. Agencies shall designate a
person to be responsible for overall
review of agency NEPA compliance.
(b) Identify methods and procedures
required by section 102(2)(B) to insure
that presently unquantified 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.
(d) 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 102C2XE) 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
statements.
(e) Comply with the requirements of
section 102(2)(H) that the agency initi-
ate and utilize ecological information
in the planning and development of
resource-oriented projects.
(f) Fulfill the requirements of sec-
tions 102C2XF), 102C2XG), and
102(2X1), of the Act and of Executive
Order 11514, Protection and Enhance-
ment of Environmental Quality, Sec.
2.
§ 1507.3 Agency procedures.
(a) Not later than eight months
after publication of these regulations
as finally adopted in the Federal Reg-
ister, 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 subunits are en-
couraged (with the consent of the de-
partment) to adopt their own proce-
dures. Such procedures shall not para-
phrase these regulations. They shall
confine themselves to implementing
procedures. Each agency shall consult
with the Council while developing its
procedures and before publishing
them in the Federal Register for
comment. Agencies with similar pro-
grams should consult with each other
A2-27
-------
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(c)(3), 1505.1,
1506.6(e), 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 (§ 1508.4)).
(iii) 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 § 1506.10 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
§ 1501.7 may be published at a reason-
able time in advance of preparation of
the draft statement.
PART 1508—TERMINOLOGY AND
INDEX
Sec.
1508.1 Terminology.
1508.2 Act.
1508.3 Affecting.
1508.4 Categorical exclusion.
1508.5 Cooperating agency.
1508.6 Council.
1508.7 Cumulative Impact.
1508.8 Effects.
1508.9 Environmental assessment.
1508.10 Environmental document.
1508.11 Environmental impact statement.
1508.12 Federal agency.
1508.13 Finding of no significant impact.
1508.14 Human environment.
1508.15 Jurisdiction by law.
1508.16 Lead agency.
1508.17 Legislation.
1508.18 Major Federal action.
1508.19 Matter.
1508.20 Mitigation.
1508.21 NEPA process.
1508.22 Notice of intent.
1508.23 Proposal.
1508.24 Referring agency.
1508.25 Scope.
1508.26 Special expertise.
1508.27 Significantly.
1508.28 Tiering.
Authority: NEPA, the Environmental
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7609), and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as
amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977).
Source: 43 FR 56003, Nov. 29, 1978, unless
otherwise noted.
A2-28
-------
§ 1508.1 Terminology.
The terminology of this part shall
be uniform throughout the Federal
Government.
§ 1508.2 Act.
"Act" means the National Environ-
mental Policy Act, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) which is also re-
ferred to as "NEPA."
§ 1508.3 Affecting.
"Affecting" means will or may have
an effect on.
§ 1508.4 Categorical exclusion.
"Categorical exclusion" means a cat-
egory of actions which do not individ-
ually or cumulatively have a signifi-
cant effect on the human environment
and which have been found to have no
such 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
§ 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.
§ 1508.5 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 § 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.
§ 1508.6 Council.
"Council" means the Council on En-
vironmental Quality established by
Title II of the Act.
§ 1508.7 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.
§ 1508.8 Effects.
"Effects" include:
(a) Direct effects, which are caused
by the action and occur at the 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 the pattern of land
use, population density or growth rate,
and related effects on air and water
and other natural systems, including
ecosystems.
Effects and impacts as used in these
regulations are synonymous. Effects
includes ecological (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 will be
beneficial.
§ 1508.9 Knvironmental assessment.
"Environmental assessment":
(a) Means a concise public document
for which a Federal agency is responsi-
ble that serves to:
(1) Briefly provide sufficient evi-
dence and analysis for determining
A2-29
-------
whether to prepare an environmental
impact statement or a finding of no
significant impact.
(2) Aid an agency's compliance with
the Act when no environmental
impact statement is necessary.
(3) Facilitate preparation of a state-
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 listing of agencies and persons con-
sulted.
§ 1508.10 Environmental document.
"Environmental document" includes
the documents specified in § 1508.9
(environmental assessment), § 1508.11
(environmental impact statement),
§ 1508.13 (finding of no significant
impact), and § 1508.22 (notice of
intent).
§ 1508.11 Environmental impact state-
ment.
"Environmental impact statement"
means a detailed written statement as
required by section 102(2)(C) of the
Act.
§ 1508.12 Federal agency.
"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 104(h) of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974.
§ 1508.13 Finding of no significant 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
(§ 1501.7(a)(5)). 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.
g 1508.14 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" (§ 1508.8).) 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 effects are
interrelated, then the environmental
impact statement will discuss all of
these effects on the human environ-
ment.
§ 1508.15 Jurisdiction by law.
"Jurisdiction by law" means agency
authority to approve, veto, or finance
all or part of the proposal.
§ 1508.16 Lead agency.
"Lead agency" means the agency or
agencies preparing or having taken
primary responsibility for preparing
the environmental impact statement.
§ 1508.17 Legislation.
"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 is 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.
§ 1508.18 Major Federal action.
"Major Federal action" includes ac-
tions with effects that may be major
and which are potentially subject to
A2-30
-------
Federal control and responsibility.
Major reinforces but does not have a
meaning independent of significantly
(§ 1508.27). Actions include the cir-
cumstance where the responsible offi-
cials fail to act and that failure to act
is reviewable 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 (§§ 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 tl\e 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 a 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.
§ 1508.19 Matter.
"Matter" includes for purposes of
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
309(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 102(2)(C) of
NEPA applies.
§ 1508.20 Mitigation.
"Mitigation" includes:
(a) Avoiding the impact altogether
by not taking a certain action or parts
of an action.
(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting
the degree or magnitude of the action
and its implementation.
(c) Rectifying the impact by repair-
ing, rehabilitating, or restoring the af-
fected environment.
(d) Reducing or eliminating the
impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations during the
life of the action.
(e) Compensating for the impact by
replacing or providing substitute re-
sources or environments.
§ 1508.21 NEPA process.
"NEPA process" means all measures
necessary for compliance with the re-
quirements of section 2 and Title I of
NEPA.
S 1508.22 Notice of intent.
"Notice of intent" means a notice
that an environmental impact state-
ment will be prepared and considered.
The notice shall briefly:
(a) Describe the proposed action and
possible alternatives.
(b) Describe the agency's proposed
scoping process including whether,
when, and where any scoping meeting
will be held.
(c) State the name and address of a
person within the agency who can
answer questions about the proposed
action and the environmental impact
statement.
A2-31
-------
§ 1508.23 Proposal.
"Proposal" exists at that stage in
the development of an action when an
agency subject to the Act has a goal
and is actively preparing to make a de-
cision on one or more alternative
means of accomplishing that goal and
the effects can be meaningfully evalu-
ated. Preparation of an environmental
Impact statement on a proposal should
be timed (§ 1502.5) 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.
§ 1508.24 Referring agency.
"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.
§ 1508.25 Scope.
Scope consists of the range of ac-
tions, alternatives, and impacts to be
considered in an environmental impact
statement. The scope of an individual
statement may depend on its relation-
ships to other statements (§§1502.20
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 impacts. 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:
(1) 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.
(iii) Are interdependent parts of a
larger action and depend on the larger
action for their justification.
(2) Cumulative actions, which when
viewed with other proposed actions
have cumulatively significant impacts
and should therefore be discussed in
the same impact statement.
(3) Similar actions, which when
viewed with other reasonably foreseea-
ble or proposed agency actions, have
similarities that provide a basis for
evaluating their environmental conse-
quencies 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 of ac-
tions.
(3) Mitigation measures (not in the
proposed action).
(c) Impacts, which may be: (1)
Direct; (2) indirect; (3) cumulative.
§ 1508.26 Special expertise.
"Special expertise" means statutory
responsibility, agency mission, or re-
lated program experience.
§ 1508.27 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 interests,
and the locality. Significance varies
with the setting of the proposed
action. For instance, in the case of a
site-specific action, significance would
usually depend upon the effects in the
locale rather than in the world as a
whole. Both short- and long-term ef-
fects are relevant.
(b) Intensity. 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 benefi-
cial and adverse. A significant effect
may exist even if the Federal atrencv
A2-32
-------
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.
(5) The degree to which the possible
effects on the human environment are
highly uncertain or involve unique or
unknown risks.
(6) The degree to which the action
may establish a precedent for future
actions with significant effects or rep-
resents a decision in principle about a
future consideration.
(7) Whether the* action is related to
other actions with individually insig-
nificant but cumulatively significant
impacts. Significance exists if it is rea-
sonable to anticipate a cumulatively
significant impact on the environment.
Significance cannot be avoided by
terming an action temporary or by
breaking it down into small compo-
nent parts.
(8) The degree to which the action
may adversely affect districts, sites,
highways, structures, or objects listed
in or eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places or may
cause loss or destruction of significant
scientific, cultural, or historical re-
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 of
1973.
(10) Whether the action threatens a
violation of Federal, State, or local law
or requirements imposed for the pro-
tection of the environment.
[43 FR 56003, Nov. 29. 1978; 44 FR 874, Jan.
3. 1979]
g 1508.28 Tiering.
"Tiering" refers to the coverage of
general matters in broader environ-
mental impact statements (such as na-
tional program or policy statements)
with subsequent narrower statements
or environmental analyses (such as re-
gional or basinwide program state-
ments or ultimately site-specific state-
ments) incorporating by reference the
general discussions and concentrating
solely on the issues specific to the
statement subsequently prepared.
Tiering is appropriate when the se-
quence of statements or analyses is:
(a) From a program, plan, or policy
environmental impact statement to a
program, plan, or policy statement or
analysis of lesser scope or to a site-spe-
cific statement or analysis.
(b) From an environmental impact
statement on a specific action at 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.
A2-33
-------
Index
Act
1508 2
Action
1508.16. 1506 25.
Acton-forcing
1500 1. 1502.1.
Adoption.
1500 4(n). 1500 5508 8
Emergencies..
1506 11
Endangered Species Act
1502 25. 1508 27(b)(9)
Energy
1502 16(e)
I nvironmcnlal Assessment
J 501 3, 15014(b), 1501 4/c).
15017(b)(3). 1506 2(b)(4).
1506 5(b). 1508 4. 1508 9.
1508 10. 1508 13.
Environmental ' Conse-
1502 10(g). 1502 16
auences
Index—Continued
Environmental Consultation
1500 4(k). 1500.5(g).
Requirements.
15017(a)(6). 1502 25.
1503 3(c).
Environmental Documents ...
1508 10
Environmental Impact State-
1500 4, 1501 4(c). 15017.
ment
1501 3, 1502 1. 1502 2,
1502.3. 1502 4. 1502 5.
1502 6. 1502 7. 1502 8,
1502.9. 1502.10, 1502 11,
1502 12. 1502 13. 1502 14.
1502 15. 1502.16. 1502 1 7,
1502 18. 1502 19. 1502 20.
1502.21, 1502 22, 1502 23,
1502 24, 1502 25,
1506.2(b)(4). 1506.3,
1506 8, 1508 11.
Environmental Protection
1502 11(0. 15041, 1504 3,
Agency
1506 7(c), 1506 9. 1506 10.
1508.19(a).
Environmental Review Re*
1500 4(k), 1500.5(g).
qutremerrts
1501 7(a)(6), 1502.25
1503.3(c).
Expediter
1501 8(b)(2)
Federal Agency
1508 1 2
Filing
1506 9.
Final Environmental Impact
1502 9(b). 1503 1. 1503.4(b).
Statement
Finding of No Significant
1500 3. 1500 4(q). 1500.5(1).
Impact.
1501 4(e). 1508 13.
Fish and Wildlife Coordina-
1502 25
tion Act.
Format for Environmental
1502 10
Impact Statement
Freedom of information Act. .
1506 6(0.
Further Guidance
1505 7
Generic
1502 4(c)(2)
Genoral Services Administra-
1506.8(b)(5)
tion
Geographic
1502 4(c)(1)
Graphics
15028
Handbook
1506.7(a)
Housing and Community De-
1506 12. 1508 12.
velopment Act.
Human Environment .. .
1502 3. 1502.22. 1508 14
Impacts . . . .
1508 8, 1508.25(c)
Implementing the Decision
1505 3
Incomplete or Unavailable In-
1502 22
formation
incorporation by Reference ...
1500 4(j). 1502.21
Index . .
1502 100)
Ind'an Tnbos ...
15012(d)(2) 15017(a)(1).
1502 1 5(C> 1503 l(a)(2)(ti).
1506 6(b)(3)(H). 1508 5,
1508 1 2
Inionsity
1508 27(b)
Interdisciplinary Preparation
1502 6. 1502 17
Interim Actions .. .
1506 1
Jomt Lead Agency
1501 5(b). 1506 2
Judicial Review
1500 3
Junsdicaton by Law
1508 15
Lead Agency
1500.5(c). 1501 1(c). 1501 5.
1501 6. 1501.7. 1501.8.
1504 3. 1506 2(b)(4)
1506 6(a). 1506 t0(e).
1508 16
Legislation
1500 50). 1502 3. 1506 8.
1508 17, 1508 18(a)
Limitation on Action During
1506 1
NEPA Process
List of Preparers.
1502.10(h). 1502 1 7
A2-34
-------
Index—Continued
Index—Continued
Local or Slate
Ma|of Federal Action
Mandate
Matter
Methodology
Mitigation
Monitoring
National Historic Preservation
Act.
National Register of Histori-
cal Places
Natural or Depletable Re-
source Requirements.
Need lor Action
NEPA Process
Non-Federal Sponsor
Notice ol Intent
OMB Circular A-95
102 Monitor
Ongoing Activities
Page Limits
Planning
Policy
Program Environmental
Impact Statement.
Programs
Proiects
Proposal
Proposed Action
Public Health and Welfare
Public Involvement
Purpose ...
Purpose of Action
1500.4(n), 1500 5(h),
1501.2(d)(2), 1501.5(b),
1501.5(d), 1501.7(a)(1),
1501.8(c). 1502.16(c),
1503.1(a)(2). 1506 2(b).
1506 6(b)(3). 1508.5,
1508.12, 1506.18.
1502 3. 1508.18.
1500.3.
1504.1, 1504.2, 1504.3.
1508.19.
1502.24.
1502.14(h), 1502.16(h),
1503.3(d). 1505.2(C),
1505.3. 1508.20.
1505.2(c). 1505.3.
1502.25.
1508.27(b)(8).
1502.16(f).
1502.10(d). 1502.13.
1508.21.
1501.2(d).
1501 7, 1507.3(e), 1508 22.
1503.1(a)(2)(ih), 1505.2,
1506.6(b)(3)(i).
1506.6(b)(2), 1506.7(c).
1506.12.
1500.4(a), 1501.7(b). 1502.7.
1500.5(a), 1501.2(b).
1502.4(a). 1508.18.
1500.2, 1502.4(b),
1508.18(a).
1500.4(1), 1502.4. 1502.20,
1508 16.
1502.4. 1508 18(b).
1508.18.
1502.4, 1502.5, 1506.8.
1508 23
1502.10(e). 1502.14.
1506.2(c)
1504 1
1501.4(e), 1503 1(a)(3).
1506.6.
1500.1, 1501.1, 1502.1.
1504.1
1502.10(d), 1502.13.
Record ol Decision
Referrals
Rofemng Agency
Response to Comments
Hural Electrification Adminis-
tration.
Scientific Accuracy
Scope
Scoping
Significantly
Similar -
Small Business Associations..
Social Effects-
Special Expertise
Specificity of Comments
State and Areawide Clean ng-
houses
State and Local
State and Local Fiscal As-
sistance Act.
Summary
Supplements to Environmen-
tal Impact Statements.
Table of Contents
Technological Development...
Terminology
Tiering
Time Limits
Timing
Treaties
When to Prepare an Environ-
mental Impact Statement
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act....
Wilderness Act
Writing
1505.2, 1506.1.
1504 1, 1504.2, 1504.3.
1506.3(d).
1504.1. 1504.2. 1504 3.
1503.4.
1506.1(d).
1502.24.
1502.4(a), 1502.9(a),
1508.25.
1500.4(b), 1501.1(d).
1501.4(d), 1501.7,
1502.9(a), 1506.8(a).
1502.3, 1508.27.
1508.25.
1506.6
-------
APPENDIX A3
CONSOLIDATED EPA NEPA REGULATIONS
40 CFR PART 6
-------
40 CFR Part 6
PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNCIL ON
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ON THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
SUBPART A - GENERAL
6.100 Purpose and policy.
6.101 Definitions.
6.102 Applicability.
6.103 Responsibilities.
6.104 Early involvement of private parties.
6.105 Synopsis of environmental review procedures.
6.106 Deviations.
6.107 Categorical exclusions.
6.108 Criteria for initiating an EIS.
SUBPART B - CONTENT OF EISs
6.200 The environmental impact statement.
6.201 Format.
6.202 Executive summary.
6.203 Body of EISs.
6.204 Incorporation by reference.
6.2 05 List of preparers.
SUBPART C - COORDINATION WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND
CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS
6.300 General.
6.301 Landmarks, historical, and archaeological sites.
6.302 Wetlands, floodplains, important farmlands, coastal
zones, wild and scenic rivers, fish and wildlife, and
endangered species.
6.303 Air quality.
SUBPART D - PUBLIC AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
6.400 Public involvement.
6.401 Official filing requirements.
6.402 Availability of documents.
6.403 The commenting process.
6.4 04 Supplements.
SUBPART E - ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR WASTEWATER
TREATMENT CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAM
6.500 Purpose.
6.501 Definitions.
6.502 Applicability and limitations.
6.503 Overview of the environmental review process.
6.504 Consultation during the facilities planning process.
6.505 Categorical exclusions.
A3-1
-------
6.506 Environmental review process.
6.507 Partitioning the environmental review process.
6.508 Findings of No Significant Impact (FNSI) determination.
6.509 Criteria for initiating Environmental Impact Statements
(EIS).
6.510 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation.
6.511 Record of Decision (ROD) for EISs and identification of
mitigation measures.
6.512 Monitoring for compliance.
6.513 Public participation.
6.514 Delegation to States.
APPENDIX A - STATEMENT of PROCEDURES on FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
and WETLANDS PROTECTION
Authority: Sees. 101, 102, and 103 of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.); also, the Council on Environmental
Quality Regulations dated Nov. 29, 1978
(40 CFR Part 1500).
Source: 44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, unless otherwise noted.
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes affecting Part 6
appear at 50 FR 26315, June 25, 1985.
SUBPART A: GENERAL
Sect. 6.100: Purpose and Policy.
(a) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq., as implemented by Executive Orders 11514 and
11991 and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations
of November 29, 1978 (43 FR 55978) requires that Federal agencies
include in their decision-making processes appropriate and
careful consideration of all environmental effects of proposed
actions, analyze potential environmental effects of proposed
actions and their alternatives for public understanding and
scrutiny, avoid or minimize adverse effects of proposed actions,
and restore and enhance environmental quality as much as
possible. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) shall
integrate these NEPA factors as early in the Agency planning
processes as possible. The environmental review process shall be
the focal point to 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 significant impact on the quality of the human
environment. This part takes into account the EIS exemptions set
forth under section 511(c)(1) of the Clean Water Act (Pub. L. 92-
9500) and section 7(c)(1) of the Energy Supply and Environmental
NOTE - Subparts F-J have not been included in this appendix
because they are not applicable to the Municipal
Wastewater Construction Grants Program
A3-2
-------
Coordination Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-9319).
(b) This part establishes EPA policy and procedures for the
identification and analysis of the environmental impacts of EPA-
related activities and the preparation and processing of EISs.
Sect. 6.101: Definitions.
(a) Terminology. All terminology used in this part will be
consistent with the terms as defined in 40 CFR Part 1508 (the CEQ
Regulations). Any qualifications will be provided in the
definitions set forth in each subpart of this regulation.
(b) The term "CEQ Regulations" means the regulations issued
by the Council on Environmental Quality on November 29, 1978 (see
43 FR 55978), which implement Executive Order 11991. The CEQ
Regulations will often be referred to throughout this regulation
by reference to 40 CFR Part 1500 et al.
(c) The term "environmental review" means the process whereby
an evaluation is undertaken by EPA to determine whether a
proposed Agency action may have a significant impact on the
environment and therefore require the preparation of the EIS.
(d) The term "environmental information 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 sufficient scope to enable the responsible
official to prepare an environmental assessment as described in
the remaining subparts of this regulation.
(e) The term "grant" as used in this part means an award
of funds or other assistance by a written grant agreement or
cooperative agreement under 40 CFR Chapter I, Subpart B.
Sect. 6.102: Applicability.
(a) Administrative actions 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
environmental review procedures required for each action.
(1) Subpart A sets forth an overview of the regulation. Section
6.102(b) describes the requirements for EPA legislative
proposals.
(2) Subpart B describes the requirements for the content of an
EIS prepared pursuant to Subparts E, F, G, H, and I.
(3) Subpart C describes the requirements for coordination of
all environmental laws during the environmental review undertaken
A3-3
-------
pursuant to Subparts E, F, G, H, and I.
(4) Subpart D describes the public information requirements
which must be undertaken in conjunction with the environmental
review requirements under Subparts E, F, G, H, and I.
(5) Subpart E describes the environmental review requirements
for the wastewater treatment construction grants program under
Title II of the Clean Water Act.
(6) Subpart F describes the environmental review requirements
for new source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits under section 402 of the Clean Water Act.
(7) Subpart G describes the environmental review requirements
for research and development programs undertaken by the Agency.
(8) Subpart H describes the environmental review requirements
for solid waste demonstration projects undertaken by the Agency.
(9) Subpart I describes the environmental review requirements
for construction of special purpose facilities and facility
renovations by the Agency.
(b) Legislative proposals. As required by the CEQ
Regulations, legislative EISs are required for any legislative
proposal developed by EPA which significantly affects the quality
of the human environment. A preliminary draft EIS shall be
prepared by the responsible EPA office concurrently with the
development of the legislative proposal and contain information
required under Subpart B. The EIS shall be processed in
accordance with the requirements set forth under 40 CFR 1506.8.
(c) Application to ongoing activities. (l) General. The
effective date for these regulations is December 5, 1979. These
regulations do not apply to an EIS or supplement to that EIS if
the draft EIS was filed with the Office of External Affairs,
(OEA) before July 30, 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 15, 1979. However, for facility
plans begun before December 15, 1979, the responsible official
shall impose no new requirements on the grantee. Such grantees
shall comply with requirements applicable before the effective
date of this regulation. Notwithstanding the above, this
regulation shall apply to any facility plan submitted to EPA
after September 30, 1980.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8,
1982]
A3-4
-------
Sect. 6.103: Responsibilities.
(a) General responsibilities. (1) The responsible official's
duties include:
(1) Requiring applicants, contractors, and grantees to submit
environmental information documents and related documents and
assuring that environmental reviews are conducted on proposed EPA
projects at the earliest possible point in EPA's decision-making
process. In this regard, the responsible official shall assure
the early involvement and availability of information for private
applicants and other non-Federal entities requiring EPA
approvals.
(ii) When required, assuring that adequate draft EISs are
prepared and distributed at the earliest possible point in EPA's
decision-making process, their internal and external review is
coordinated, and final EISs are prepared and distributed.
(iii) When an EIS is not prepared, assuring documentation of
the decision to grant a categorical exclusion, or assuring that
findings of no significant impact (FNSIs) and environmental
assessments are prepared and distributed for those actions
requiring them.
(iv) Consulting with appropriate officials responsible for
other environmental laws set forth in Subpart C.
(v) Consulting with the Office of External Affairs (OEA) on
actions involving unresolved conflicts concerning this part or
other Federal agencies.
(vi) When required, assuring that public participation
requirements are met.
(2) Office of External Affairs duties include: (i) Supporting
the Administrator in providing EPA policy guidance and assuring
that EPA offices establish and maintain adequate administrative
procedures to comply with this part.
(ii) Monitoring the overall timeliness and quality of the EPA
effort to comply with this part.
(iii) Providing assistance to responsible officials as
required, i.e., preparing guidelines describing the scope of
environmental information required by private applicants relating
to their proposed actions.
(iv) Coordinating the training of personnel involved in the
review and preparation of EISs and other associated documents.
(v) Acting as EPA liaison with the Council on Environmental
Quality and other Federal and State entities on matters of EPA
policy and administrative mechanisms to facilitate external
review of EISs, to determine lead agency and to improve the
A3-5
-------
uniformity of the NEPA procedures of Federal agencies.
(vi) 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, when these projects have had or should have an EIS
prepared on them.
(vii) Carrying out administrative duties relating to
maintaining status of EISs within EPA, i.e., publication of
notices of intent in the Federal Register and making available to
the public status reports on EISs and other elements of the
environmental review process.
(3) Office of an Assistant Administrator duties include:
(i) Providing specific policy guidance to their respective
offices and assuring that those offices 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.
(iii) Acting as liaison between their offices and the OEA and
between their offices and other Assistant Administrators or
Regional Administrators on matters of agencywide policy and
procedures.
(iv) Advising the Administrator and Deputy Administrator
through the OEA on projects or activities within their respective
areas of responsibilities which involve more than one EPA office,
are highly controversial, are nationally significant, or
"pioneer" EPA policy, when these projects will have or should
have an EIS prepared on them.
(v) Pursuant to 6.102(b) of this subpart, preparing legislative
EISs as appropriate on EPA legislative initiatives.
(4) The Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation duties
include: responsibilities for coordinating the preparation of
EISs required on EPA legislative proposals in accordance with
6.102(b).
(b) Responsibilities for Subpart E. (1) Responsible official.
The responsible official for EPA actions covered by this subpart
is the Regional Administrator.
(2) Assistant Administrator. The responsibilities of the
Assistant Administrator, as described in 6.103(a)(3), shall be
assumed by the Assistant Administrator for Water for EPA actions
covered by this subpart.
(c) Responsibilities for Subpart F. (1) Responsible official.
The responsible official for activities covered by this subpart
is the Regional Administrator.
A3-6
-------
(2) Assistant Administrator. The responsibilities of the
Assistant Administrator, as described in 6.103(a)(3), shall be
assumed by the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Monitoring for EPA actions covered by this subpart.
(d) Responsibilities for Subpart G. The Assistant
Administrator for Research and Development will be the
responsible official for activities covered by this subpart.
(e) Responsibilities for Subpart H. The Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response will be the
responsible official for activities covered by this subpart.
(f) Responsibilities for Subpart I. The responsible official
for new construction 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 Administration and Resource Management (OARM)
shall be the responsible official on all new construction of
special purpose facilities and on all new modification projects
for which the Facilities Engineering and Real Estate Branch has
received a funding allowance and for all other field components
not covered elsewhere in paragraph (f) of this section.
(2) The Regional Administrator shall be the responsible
official on all improvement and modification projects for which
the regional office has received the funding allowance.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8,
1982; 50 FR 26315, June 25, 1985? 51 FR 32609, Sept. 12, 1986]
Sect. 6.104: Early involvement of private parties.
As required by 40 CFR 1501.2(d) and 6.103(a)(3)(v) of this
regulation, responsible officials must ensure early involvement
of private applicants or other non-Federal entities in the
environmental review process related to EPA grant and permit
actions set forth under Subparts E, F, G, and H. The responsible
official in conjunction with OEA shall:
(a) Prepare where practicable, generic guidelines describing
the scope and level of environmental information required from
applicants as a basis for evaluating their proposed actions, and
make these guidelines available upon request.
(b) Provide such guidance on a project-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, consult as
required with other appropriate parties to initiate and
A3-7
-------
coordinate the necessary environmental analyses.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8,
1982]
Sect. 6.105: Synopsis of environmental review procedures.
(a) Responsible official. The responsible 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 supplemented
by professionals from other agencies (see 40 CFR 1501.6) or
consultants whenever in-house capabilities are insufficiently
interdisciplinary.
(b) Environmental information documents (EID). Environmental
information documents (EIDs) must be prepared by applicants,
grantees, or permittees and submitted to EPA as required in
Subparts E, F, G, H, and I. EIDs will be of sufficient scope to
enable the responsible official to prepare an environmental
assessment as described under 6.105(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 reviews. Environmental reviews shall be
conducted on the EPA activities outlined in 6.102 of this part
and set forth under Subparts E, F, G, H and I. This process shall
consist of a study of the action to identify and evaluate the
related environmental impacts. The process shall include a review
of any related environmental information document to determine
whether any significant impacts are anticipated and whether any
changes can be made in the proposed action to eliminate
significant adverse impacts; when an EIS is required, EPA has
overall responsibility for this review, although grantees,
applicants, permittees or contractors will contribute to the
review through submission of environmental information documents.
(d) Environmental assessments. Environmental assessments
(i.e., concise public documents for which EPA is responsible) are
prepared to provide sufficient data and analysis to determine
whether an EIS or finding of no significant impact is required.
Where EPA determines that a categorical exclusion is appropriate
or an EIS will be prepared, there is no need to prepare a formal
environmental assessment.
(e) Notice of intent and EISs. When the environmental review
indicates that a significant environmental impact may occur and
significant adverse 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 Register, scoping shall be
undertaken in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.7, and a draft EIS
shall be prepared and distributed. After external coordination
A3-8
-------
and evaluation of the comments received, a final EIS shall be
prepared and disseminated. The final EIS shall list any
mitigation measures necessary to make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
(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 adverse impacts, a FNSI shall be issued and made
available to the public. The environmental assessment shall be
included as a part of the FNSI. The FNSI shall list any
mitigation measures necessary to make the recommended alternative
environmentally acceptable.
(g) Record of decision. At the time of its decision on any
action for which a final EIS has been prepared, the responsible
official shall prepare a concise public record of the decision.
The record of decision shall describe those mitigation measures
to be undertaken which will make the selected alternative
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 official shall provide for
monitoring to assure that decisions on any action where a final
EIS has been prepared are properly implemented. Appropriate
mitigation measures shall be included in actions undertaken by
EPA.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26315, June 25,
1985; 51 FR 32610, Sept. 12, 1986]
Sect. 6.106: Deviations.
(a) General. The Assistant Administrator, OEA, is authorized
to approve deviations from these regulations. Deviation approvals
shall be made in writing by the Assistant Administrator, OEA.
(b) Requirements. (1) Where emergency circumstances make it
necessary to take an action with significant environmental 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
responsible official shall consider to the extent possible
alternative arrangements; such arrangements will be limited to
actions necessary to control the immediate impacts of the
emergency; other actions remain subject to the environmental
review process. The Assistant Administrator, OEA, after
consulting CEQ, will inform the responsible official, as
expeditiously as possible of the disposition of his request.
(2) Where circumstances make it necessary to take action
A3-9
-------
without observing procedural provisions of these regulations, the
responsible official shall notify the Assistant Administrator,
OEA, before taking such action. If the Assistant Administrator,
OEA, determines such a deviation would be in the best interest of
the Government, he shall inform the responsible official, as soon
as possible, of his approval.
(3) The Assistant Administrator, OEA, shall coordinate his
action on a deviation under 6.106(b) (1) or (2) of this part
with the Director, Grants Administration Division, Office of
Planning and Management, for any required grant-related deviation
under 40 CFR 30.1000, as well as the appropriate Assistant
Administrator.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8,
1982]
Sect. 6.107: Categorical exclusions.
(a) General. 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 Sect.
6.505, may be exempted from the substantive environmental review
requirements of this part. Environmental information documents
and environmental assessments or environmental impact statements
will not be required for excluded actions.
(b) Determination. The responsible official shall determine
whether an action is eligible for a categorical exclusion as
established by general criteria in Sect. 6.107 (d) and (e) and
any applicable criteria in program specific subparts of Part 6 of
this title. A determination shall be made as early as possible
following the receipt of an application. The responsible official
shall document the decision to issue or deny an exclusion as soon
as practicable following review in accordance with Sect.
6.400(f). For qualified actions, the documentation shall include
the application, a brief description of the proposed 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 official shall revoke a
categorical exclusion and shall require a full environmental
review if, subsequent to the granting of an exclusion, the
responsible official determines that: (1) The proposed action no
longer meets the requirements for a categorical exclusion due to
changes in the proposed action; or (2) determines from new
evidence that serious local or environmental issues exist; or (3)
that Federal, State, local, or tribal laws are being or may be
violated.
A3-10
-------
(d) General categories of actions eligible 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 existing facilities, functional replacement of
equipment, or towards the construction of new ancillary
facilities adjacent or appurtenant to existing facilities;
(2) Other actions specifically allowed in program specific
subparts of this regulation; or
(3) Other actions developed in accordance with paragraph (f) of
this section.
(e) General criteria for not granting a categorical exclusion.
(1) The full environmental review procedures of this part must be
followed if undertaking an action consistent with allowable
categories in paragraph (d) of this section may involve serious
local or environmental 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 federal, State, local, tribal or private actions;
(ii) The action is known or expected to directly or indirectly
affect:
(A) Cultural resource areas such as archaeological and
historic sites in accordance with Sect. 6.301,
(B) Endangered or threatened species and their critical
habitats in accordance with Sect. 6.302 or State lists,
(C) Environmentally important natural resource areas such as
floodplains, wetlands, important farmlands, aquifer recharge
zones in accordance with Sect. 6.302, 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 significant public controversy; or
(iv) Appropriate specialized program specific criteria for not
granting an exclusion found in other subparts of this regulation
are applicable to the action.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (d) of this
section, if any of the conditions cited in paragraph (e)(1) of
this section exist, the responsible official shall ensure:
(i) That a categorical exclusion is not granted or, if
A3-11
-------
previously granted, that it is revoked according to paragraph (c)
of this section;
(ii) That an adequate EID is prepared; and
(iii) That either an environmental assessment and FNSI or a
notice of intent for an EIS and ROD is prepared and issued.
(f) Developing new categories of excluded actions. The
responsible official, or other interested parties, may request
that a new general or specialized program specific category of
excluded actions be created, or that an existing category be
amended or deleted. The request shall be in writing to the
Assistant Administrator, OEA, and shall contain adequate
information to support the request. Proposed new categories shall
be developed by OEA and published in the Federal Register as
a proposed rule, amending paragraph (d) of this section when the
proposed new category applies to all eligible programs or,
amending appropriate paragraphs in other subparts of this part
when the proposed new category applies to one specific program.
The publication shall include a thirty (30) day public comment
period. In addition to criteria for specific programs listed in
other subparts of this part, the following general criteria shall
be considered in evaluating proposals for new categories:
(1) Any action taken seldom results in the effects identified
in general or specialized program specific criteria identified
through the application of criteria for not granting a
categorical exclusion;
(2) Based upon previous environmental reviews, actions
consistent with the proposed category have not required the
preparation of an EIS; and
(3) Whether information adequate to determine if a potential
action is consistent with the proposed category will normally be
available when needed.
[50 FR 26315, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32610, Sept.
12,1986]
Sect. 6.108: Criteria for initiating an EIS.
The responsible official shall assure that an EIS will be
prepared and issued for actions under Subparts E, G, H, and I
when it is determined that any of the following conditions exist:
(a) The Federal action may significantly affect the pattern and
type of land use (industrial, commercial, agricultural,
recreational, residential) or growth and distribution of
population;
(b) The effects resulting from any structure or facility
A3 -12
-------
constructed or operated under the proposed action may conflict
with local, regional or State land use plans or policies;
(c) The proposed action 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 wetlands;
(d) The proposed action may significantly affect threatened and
endangered species or their habitats identified in the Department
of the Interior's list, in accordance with Sect. 6.302, or a
State's list, or a structure or a facility constructed or
operated under the proposed action may be located in the habitat;
(e) Implementation of the proposed action or plan may directly
cause or induce changes that significantly:
(1) Displace population;
(2) Alter the character of existing residential areas;
(3) Adversely affect a floodplain; or
(4) Adversely affect significant amounts of important farmlands
as defined in requirements in 6.302(c), or agricultural
operations on this land.
(f) The proposed action may, directly, indirectly or
cumulatively have significant adverse effect on parklands,
preserves, other public lands or areas of recognized scenic,
recreational, archaeological, or historic value; or
(g) The Federal action may directly or through induced
development have a significant adverse effect upon local ambient
air quality, local ambient noise levels, surface water or
groundwater quality or quantity, water supply, fish, shellfish,
wildlife, and their natural habitats.
SUBPART B - CONTENT OF EISs
Sect. 6.200: The environmental impact statement.
Preparers of EISs must conform with the requirements of 40 CFR
Part 1502 in writing EISs.
Sect. 6.201: Format.
The format used for EISs shall encourage good analysis and
clear presentation of alternatives, including the proposed
action, and their environmental, economic and social impacts. The
following standard format for EISs should be used unless the
responsible official determines that there is a compelling reason
to do otherwise:
A3-13
-------
(a) Cover sheet;
(b) Executive Summary;
(c) 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 EIS are sent);
(i) List of preparers;
(j) Index (commensurate with complexity of EIS);
(k) Appendices.
Sect. 6.2 02: Executive summary.
The executive summary shall describe in sufficient detail 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 shall focus on:
(a) The existing problem;
(b) A brief description of each alternative evaluated
(including the preferred and no action alternatives) along with a
listing of the environmental impacts, possible mitigation
measures 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 accordance with 4 0 CFR
1502.19, the comprehensive summary may be circulated in lieu of
the EIS; however, both documents shall be distributed to any
Federal, State and local agencies who have EIS review
responsibilities and also shall be made available to other
interested parties upon request.
Sect. 6.203: Body of EISs.
(a) Purpose and need. The EIS shall clearly specify the
underlying purpose and need to which EPA is responding. If the
action is a request for a permit or a grant, the EIS shall
clearly specify the goals and objectives of the applicant.
(b) Alternatives including the proposed action. In addition
to 40 CFR 1502.14, the EIS shall discuss:
(1) Alternatives considered by the applicant. This section
shall include a balanced description of each alternative
A3-14
-------
considered by the applicant. These discussions shall include size
and location of facilities, land requirements, operation and
maintenance requirements, auxiliary structures such as pipelines
or transmission lines, and construction schedules. The
alternative of no action shall be discussed and the applicant's
preferred alternative(s) 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) Alternatives available to EPA. EPA alternatives to be
discussed shall include: (i) Taking an action; or (ii) taking an
action on a modified or alternative project, including an action
not considered by the applicant; and (iii) denying the action.
(3) Alternatives available to other permitting agencies. When
preparing a joint EIS, and if applicable, the alternatives
available to other Federal and/or State agencies shall be
discussed.
(4) Identifying preferred alternative. In the final EIS, the
responsible official shall signify the preferred alternative.
(c) Affected environment and environmental consequences of the
alternatives. The affected environment on which the evaluation
of each alternative shall be based includes, for example,
hydrology, geology, air quality, noise, biology, socioeconomics,
energy, land use, and archaeology and historic subjects. The
discussion shall be structured so as to present the total impacts
of each alternative for easy comparison among all alternatives by
the reader. The effects of a ''no action'1 alternative should be
included to facilitate reader comparison of the beneficial and
adverse impacts of other alternatives to the applicant doing
nothing. A description of the environmental setting shall be
included in the 'no action'¦ alternative for the purpose of
providing needed background information. The amount of detail in
describing the affected environment shall be commensurate with
the complexity of the situation and the importance of the
anticipated impacts.
(d) Coordination. The EIS shall include: (1) The objections
and suggestions made by local, State, and Federal agencies before
and during the EIS review process must be given full
consideration, along with the issues of public concern expressed
by individual citizens and interested environmental groups. The
EIS must include discussions of any such comments concerning our
actions, and the author of each comment should be identified. If
a comment has resulted in a change in 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 hearing has been
held prior to the publication 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.
A3-15
-------
(3) In the final EIS, a summary of the coordination process and
EPA responses to comments on the draft EIS shall be included.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25,
1985]
Sect. 6.204: Incorporation by reference.
In addition to 40 CFR 1502.21, material incorporated into an
EIS by reference shall be organized to the extent possible into a
Supplemental Information Document and be made available for
review upon request. No material may be incorporated by reference
unless it is reasonably available for inspection by potentially
interested persons within the period allowed for comment.
Sect. 6.2 05: List of preparers.
When the EIS is prepared by contract, 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 contents. The EPA officials who undertake this
evaluation shall also be described under the list of preparers.
SUBPART C - COORDINATION WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND
CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS
Sect. 6.300: 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 implementation of the environmental
review process under Subparts E through I. This subpart presents
the central requirements of these laws and executive orders. It
refers to the pertinent authority 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 procedures implementing these laws and
executive orders.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25,
1985]
Sect. 6.301: Landmarks, historical, and archaeological sites.
EPA is subject to the requirements of the Historic Sites Act of
1935, 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq., the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq., the
Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, 16 U.S.C.
469 et seq., and Executive Order 11593, entitled ""Protection
and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment.'' These statutes,
regulations and executive orders establish review procedures
A3-16
-------
independent of NEPA requirements.
(a) National natural landmarks. Under the Historic Sites Act
of 1935, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to designate
areas as national natural landmarks for listing on the National
Registry of Natural Landmarks. In conducting an environmental
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 62.6(d) to avoid undesirable impacts upon such landmarks.
(b) Historic, architectural, archaeological, and cultural
sites. Under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and Executive Order 11593, if an EPA undertaking affects any
property with historic, architectural, archaeological 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 consultation and comment
promulgated by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in
3 6 CFR Part 800. The responsible official must identify
properties affected by the undertaking that are potentially
eligible for listing on the National Register and shall request a
determination of eligibility from the Keeper of the National
Register, Department of the Interior, under the procedures in 3 6
CFR Part 63.
(c) Historic, prehistoric and archaeological data. Under the
Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, if an EPA activity
may cause irreparable loss or destruction of significant
scientific, prehistoric, historic or archaeological data, the
responsible official or the Secretary of the Interior is
authorized to undertake data recovery and preservation
activities. Data recovery and preservation activities shall be
conducted in accordance with implementing procedures promulgated
by the Secretary of the Interior. The National Park Service has
published technical standards and guidelines regarding
archaeological preservation activities and methods at 48 FR 44716
(September 29, 1983).
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25,
1985]
Sect. 6.302: Wetlands, floodplains, important farmlands,
coastal zones, wild and scenic rivers, fish and
wildlife, and endangered species.
The following procedures shall apply to EPA administrative
actions in programs to which the pertinent statute or executive
order applies.
(a) Wetlands protection. Executive Order 11990, Protection of
Wetlands, requires Federal agencies conducting certain activities
to avoid, to the extent possible, the adverse impacts associated
with the destruction or loss of wetlands and to avoid support of
A3-17
-------
new construction in wetlands if a practicable alternative exists.
EPA's Statement of Procedures on Floodplain Management and
Wetlands Protection (dated January 5, 1979, incorporated as
Appendix A hereto) requires EPA programs to determine if proposed
actions will be in or will affect wetlands. If so, the
responsible official shall prepare a floodplains/wetlands
assessment, which will be part of the environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement. The responsible official shall
either avoid adverse impacts or minimize them if no practicable
alternative to the action exists.
(b) Floodplain management. Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management, requires Federal agencies to evaluate the potential
effects of actions they may take in a floodplain to avoid, to the
extent possible, adverse effects associated with direct and
indirect development of a floodplain. EPA's Statement of
Procedures on Floodplain Management and Wetlands Protection
(dated January 5, 1979, incorporated as Appendix A hereto),
requires EPA programs to determine whether an action will be
located in or will affect a floodplain. If so, the responsible
official shall prepare a floodplain/wetlands assessment. The
assessment will become part of the environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement. The responsible official shall
either avoid adverse impacts or minimize them if no practicable
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 agricultural lands from
irreversible conversion to uses which result in its loss as an
environmental or essential food production resource. In addition
the Farmland Protection Policy Act, (FPPA) 7 U.S.C. 4201 et
seq., requires federal agencies to use criteria developed by the
Soil Conservation Service, U.S. 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; [and]
(2) Consider alternative actions, as appropriate,
that could lessen such adverse impacts; and (3) assure that their
programs, to the extent possible, are compatible with State and
local government and private programs and policies to protect
farmlands. If an EPA action may adversely impact farmlands which
are classified prime, unique or of State and local importance as
defined in the Act, the responsible official shall in all cases
apply the evaluative criteria promulgated by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture at 7 CFR Part 658. If categories of important
farmlands, which include 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.
A3-18
-------
(d) Coastal zone management. The Coastal Zone Management Act,
16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq., requires that all Federal activities in
coastal areas be consistent with approved State Coastal 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 management program, a consistency
determination shall be sought in accordance with procedures
promulgated by the Office of Coastal Zone Management in 15 CFR
Part 930.
(e) Wild and scenic rivers. (1) The Wild and Scenic Rivers
Act, 16 U.S.C. 1274 et seq., 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
Inventory 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 Inventory was established, as determined by the
Secretary of the Interior for rivers under the jurisdiction of
the Department of the Interior and by the Secretary of
Agriculture for rivers under the jurisdiction of the Department
of Agriculture. Nothing contained in the foregoing sentence,
however, shall:
(1) Preclude licensing of, or assistance to, developments below
or above a wild, scenic or recreational river area or on any
stream tributary thereto which will not invade the area or
unreasonably diminish the scenic, recreational, and fish and
wildlife values present in the area on October 2, 1968; or
(ii) Preclude licensing of, or assistance 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 2, 1968.
(2) The responsible official shall:
(i) Determine whether there are any wild, scenic or study
rivers on the National Rivers Inventory or in the planning 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
administering Secretary in request of appropriations to begin
construction of any such project, whether heretofore or hereafter
authorized, without advising the administering Secretary, in
writing of this intention at least sixty days in advance, and
A3-19
-------
without specifically reporting to the Congress in writing at the
time the recommendation or request is made in what respect
construction of such project would be in conflict with the
purposes of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and would affect the
component and the values to be protected by the Responsible
Official under the Act.
(3) Applicable consultation requirements are found in section 7
of the Act. The Department of Agriculture has promulgated
implementing procedures, under section 7 at 36 CFR Part 297,
which apply to water resource projects located within, above,
below or outside a wild and scenic river or study river under the
Department's jurisdiction.
(f) Barrier islands. The Coastal Barrier Resources Act, 16
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. , 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 the Interior. The responsible
official shall ensure that consultation is 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 assistance, and describing procedures
for consultation at 48 FR 45664 (October 6, 1983).
(g) Fish and wildlife protection. The Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq., 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 Wildlife Service and the
appropriate State agency to ascertain the means and measures
necessary to mitigate, prevent and compensate for project-related
losses of wildlife resources and to enhance the resources.
Reports and recommendations of wildlife agencies should be
incorporated into the environmental assessment or environmental
impact statement. Consultation procedures are detailed in 16
U.S.C. 662.
(h) Endangered species protection. Under the Endangered
Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., Federal agencies are
prohibited from jeopardizing threatened or endangered species or
adversely modifying habitats essential to their survival. The
responsible official shall identify all designated endangered or
threatened species or their habitat that may be affected by an
EPA action. If listed species or their habitat may be affected,
formal consultation must be undertaken with the Fish and Wildlife
Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service, as appropriate.
If the consultation reveals that the EPA activity may jeopardize
a listed species or habitat, mitigation measures should be
considered. Applicable consultation procedures are found in 50
A3-2 0
-------
CFR Part 402.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25,
1985]
Sect. 6.303: Air quality.
(a) The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977, 42 U.S.C. 7476(c),
requires all Federal projects, licenses, permits, plans, and
financial assistance activities to conform to any State Air
Quality Implementation Plan (SIP) approved or promulgated under
section 110 of the Act. For proposed EPA actions that may
significantly affect air quality, the responsible official shall
assess the extent of the direct or indirect increases in
emissions and the resultant change in air quality.
(b) If the proposed action may have a significant direct or
indirect adverse effect on air quality, the responsible official
shall consult with the appropriate State and local agencies as to
the conformity of the proposed action with the SIP. Such agencies
shall include the State agency with primary responsibility for
the SIP, the agency designated under section 174 of the Clean Air
Act and, where appropriate, the metropolitan planning
organization (MPO). This consultation should include a request
for a recommendation as to the conformity of the proposed action
with the SIP.
(c) The responsible official shall provide an assurance in the
FNSI or the draft EIS that the proposed action conforms with the
SIP.
(d) The assurance of conformity shall be based on a
determination of the following:
(1) The proposed action will be in compliance with all
applicable Federal and State air pollution emission limitations
and standards;
(2) The direct and indirect air pollution emissions resulting
from the proposed action have been expressly quantified in the
emissions growth allowance 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 impacts;
(3) The proposed action conforms to the SIP's provisions for
demonstrating reasonable further progress toward attainment of
the national ambient air quality standards by the required date;
(4) The proposed action complies with all other provisions and
requirements of the SIP.
(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 responsibility for the SIP to concur or nonconcur
A3-21
-------
with the determination of conformity. All State notifications of
concurrence or nonconcurrence with the EPA conformity
determination shall include a record of consultation with the
appropriate 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 provide in the FNSI or the
final EIS a response to a notification of state nonconcurrence
with the EPA conformity determination. This response shall
include the basis by which the conformity of the proposed action
to the SIP will be assured. If the responsible official finds
that the State nonconcurrence with the EPA conformity
determination is unjustified, then an explanation of this finding
shall be included in the FNSI or the final EIS.
(g) With regard to wastewater treatment works subject to review
under Subpart E of this part, the responsible official shall
consider the air pollution control requirements specified in
section 316(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7616, and Agency
implementing procedures.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26317, June 25,
1985]
SUBPART D - PUBLIC AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
Sect. 6.400: Public involvement.
(a) General. EPA shall make diligent efforts to involve the
public in the environmental review process consistent with
program regulations and EPA policies on public participation. The
responsible official shall ensure that public notice is provided
for in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.6(b) and shall ensure that
public involvement is carried out in accordance with EPA Public
Participation Regulations, 40 CFR Part 25, and other applicable
EPA public participation procedures.
(b) Publication of notices of intent. As soon as practicable
after his decision to prepare an EIS and before the scoping
process, the responsible official shall send the notice of intent
to interested and affected members of the public and shall
request the OEA to publish the notice of intent in the Federal
Register. The responsible official 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 1501.7.
Participants in the scoping process shall be kept informed of
substantial changes which evolve during the EIS drafting process.
(c) Public meetings or hearings. Public meetings or hearings
shall be conducted consistent with Agency program requirements.
There shall be a presumption that a scoping meeting will be
A3-2 2
-------
conducted whenever a notice of intent has been published. The
responsible official shall conduct a public hearing on a draft
EIS. The responsible official shall ensure that the draft EIS is
made available to the public at least 30 days in advance of the
hearing.
(d) Findings of no significant impact (FNSI). The responsible
official shall allow for sufficient public review of a FNSI
before it becomes effective. The FNSI and attendant publication
must state that interested persons disagreeing with the decision
may submit comments to EPA. The responsible official shall not
take administrative action on the project for at least thirty
(30) calendar days after release of the FNSI and may allow more
time for response. The responsible official shall consider,
fully, comments submitted on the FNSI before taking
administrative action. The FNSI shall be made available to the
public in accordance with the requirements and all appropriate
recommendations contained in 1506.6 of this title.
(e) Record of Decision (ROD). The responsible official shall
disseminate the ROD to those parties which commented on the draft
or final EIS.
(f) Categorical exclusions. An applicant who files for and
receives a determination of categorical exclusion under 6.107(a),
or has one rescinded under 6.107(c), shall publish a notice
indicating the determination of eligibility or rescission in a
local newspaper of community-wide circulation and indicate the
availability of the supporting documentation for public
inspection. The responsible official shall, concurrent with the
publication of the notice: Make the documentation as outlined in
6.107(b) available to the public; and distribute the notice of
the determination to all known interested parties.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 51 FR 32611, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.401: Official filing requirements.
(a) General. OEA is responsible for the conduct of the
official filing system for EISs. This system was established as a
central repository for all EISs which serves not only as means of
advising the public of the availability of each EIS but provides
a uniform method for the computation of minimum 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 45-
day and 30-day review periods for draft and final EISs,
respectively, are computed from the Friday following a given
reporting week. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9, responsible officials
shall comply with the guidelines established by OEA on the
conduct of the filing system.
(b) Minimum time periods. No decision on EPA actions shall be
made until the later of the following dates: (1) Ninety (90) days
A3-2 3
-------
after the date established in 6.401(a) of this part from which
the draft EIS review time period is computed.
(2) Thirty (30) days after the date established in 6.401(a) of
this part from which the final EIS review time period is
computed.
(c) Filing of EISs. 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. OEA will provide CEQ
with one copy of each EIS filed. No EIS will be officially 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 responsible official may
independently extend review periods. In such cases, the
responsible official shall notify OEA as soon as possible so that
adequate notice may be published in the weekly Federal Register
report. OEA upon a showing of compelling reasons of national
policy may reduce the prescribed review periods. Also, OEA upon a
showing by any other Federal agency of compelling reasons of
national policy may extend prescribed review periods, but only
after consultation 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 3 0 days
beyond the minimum prescribed review period.
(e) Rescission of filed EISs. The responsible official shall
file EISs with OEA at the same time they are transmitted to
commenting agencies and made available to the public. The
responsible official is required to reproduce 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 retraction of the EIS or revision of the prescribed
review periods based on the circumstances.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8,
1982]
Sect. 6.402: Availability of documents.
(a) General. The responsible official will ensure sufficient
copies of the EIS are distributed to interested and affected
members of the public and are made available for further public
distribution. EISs, comments received, and any underlying
documents should be available to the public pursuant to the
provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)),
without regard to the exclusion for interagency memoranda where
such memoranda transmit comments of Federal agencies on the
environmental impact of the proposed actions. To the extent
•practicable, materials made available to the public shall be
provided without charge; otherwise, a fee may be imposed which is
not more than the actual cost of reproducing copies required to
A3-24
-------
be sent to another Federal agency.
(b) Public information. Lists of all notices, determinations
and other reports/documentation, related to these notices and
determinations, involving CEs, EAs, FNSIs, notices of intent,
EISs, and RODs prepared by EPA shall be available for public
inspection and maintained by the responsible official as a
monthly status report. OEA shall maintain a comprehensive list of
notices of intent and draft and final EISs provided by all
responsible officials for public inspection including publication
in the Federal Register. In addition, OEA will make copies of
all EPA-prepared EISs available for public inspection; the
responsible official shall do the same for any EIS he/she
undertakes.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 51 FR 32611, Sept. 12,
1986]
Sect. 6.403: The commenting process.
(a) Inviting comments. After preparing a draft EIS and before
preparing a final EIS, the responsible official shall obtain the
comments of Federal agencies, other governmental entities and the
public in accordance with 40 CFR 1503.1.
(b) Response to comments. The responsible official shall
respond to comments in the final EIS in accordance with 40 CFR
1503.4.
Sect. 6.404: Supplements.
(a) General. The responsible official shall consider
preparing supplements to draft and final EISs in accordance with
40 CFR 1502.9(c). A supplement shall be prepared, circulated and
filed in the same fashion (exclusive of scoping) as draft and
final EISs.
(b) Alternative procedures. In the case where the responsible
official wants to deviate from existing procedures, OEA shall be
consulted. OEA shall consult with CEQ on any alternative
arrangements.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8,
1982]
SUBPART E - ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR WASTEWATER
TREATMENT CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAMS.
Sect. 6.500: Purpose.
This subpart amplifies the procedures described in Subparts A
through D with detailed environmental review procedures for the
A3-25
-------
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works Construction Grants Program
under Title II of the Clean Water Act.
Sect. 6.501: Definitions.
(a) "Step 1 facilities planning" means 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 described in 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E or I.
(d) "Step 2+3" means a project which combines preparation
of design drawings and specifications as described in 6.501(b)
and building as described in 6.501(c).
(e) "Applicant" means any individual, agency, or entity
which has filed an application for grant assistance under 40 CFR
Part 35, Subpart E or I.
(f) "Grantee" means any individual, agency, or entity which
has been awarded wastewater treatment construction grant
assistance under 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E or I.
(g) "Responsible Official" means a Federal or State
official authorized to fulfill the requirements of this subpart.
The responsible federal official is the EPA Regional
Administrator and the responsible State official is as defined in
a delegation agreement under 205(g) of the Clean Water Act. The
responsibilities of the State official are subject to the
limitations in 6.514 of this subpart.
(h) "Approval of the facilities plan" means approval of the
facilities plan for a proposed wastewater treatment works
pursuant to 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E or I.
Sect. 6.502: Applicability and limitations.
(a) Applicability. This subpart applies 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 significant
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 assistance pursuant to 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart E or I.
A3-2 6
-------
(b) Limitations. (1) Except as provided in 6.504(c), all
recipients of Step 1 grant assistance must comply with the
requirements, steps, and procedures 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 6.507, no step 3 or 2+3
grant assistance may be awarded for the construction 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 planning area, or any larger study area identified
for the purposes of conducting an adequate environmental review
as required under this subpart; and
(ii) Recorded the selection of the preferred alternative(s) in
the appropriate decision document (ROD for EISs, FNSI for
environmental assessments, or written determination for
categorical exclusions).
(4) In accord with 6.302(f), on or after October 18, 1982, no
new expenditures or financial assistance involving the
construction grants program can be made within the Coastal
Barrier Resource System, or for projects outside the system which
would have the effect of encouraging development in the system,
other than specified exceptions made by the EPA after
consultation with the Secretary of the Interior.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32611, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.503: Overview of the environmental review process.
The process for conducting an environmental review of
wastewater treatment construction grant projects includes the
following steps:
(a) Consultation. The Step 1 grantee or the potential Step 3
or Step 2+3 applicant 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 environmental review
requirements of this part (6.505), to determine alternatives to
the proposed project for evaluation, to identify potential
environmental 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
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
A3-27
-------
(b) Determining categorical exclusion eligibility. At the
request of a potential Step 3 or Step 2+3 grant applicant, or a
Step 1 facilities planning grantee, the responsible official will
determine if a project is eligible for a categorical exclusion in
accordance with 6.505. A Step 1 facilities planning 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 submission
of a Step 3 or Step 2+3 grant application.
(c) Documenting environmental information. If the project is
determined to be ineligible for a categorical exclusion, or if no
request for a categorical exclusion is made, the potential Step 3
or Step 2+3 applicant or the Step 1 grantee subsequently prepares
an Environmental Information Document (EID) (6.506) for the
project.
(d) Preparing environmental assessments. Except as provided
in 6.506(c)(4) and following a review of the EID by EPA or by a
State with delegated authority, EPA prepares an environmental
assessment (6.506), or a State with delegated authority (6.514)
prepares a preliminary environmental assessment. EPA reviews and
finalizes any preliminary assessments. EPA subsequently:
(1) Prepares and issues a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FNSI) (6.508); or
(2) Prepares and issues a Notice of Intent to prepare an
original or supplemental EIS (6.510) and Record of Decision (ROD)
(6.511).
(e) Monitoring. The construction and post-construction
operation and maintenance of the facilities are monitored (6.512)
to ensure implementation of mitigation measures (6.511)
identified in the FNSI or ROD.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32611, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.504: Consultation during the facilities planning
process.
(a) General. Consistent with 40 CFR 1501.2 and 35.2030(c), the
responsible official shall initiate the environmental review
process early to identify environmental effects, avoid delays,
and resolve conflicts. The environmental review process should be
integrated throughout the facilities planning process. Two
processes for consultation are described in this section to meet
this objective. The first addresses projects awarded Step 1 grant
assistance on or before December 29, 1981. The second applies to
projects not receiving grant assistance for facilities planning
on or before December 29, 1981 and, therefore, subject to the
regulations implementing the Municipal Wastewater Treatment
A3-2 8
-------
Construction Grant Amendments of 1981 (40 CFR Part 35, Subpart
I) •
(b) Projects receiving Step 1 grant assistance on or before
December 29, 1981. (1) During facilities planning, the grantee
shall evaluate project alternatives and the existence of
environmentally important resource areas including those
identified in 6.108 and 6.509 of this subpart, and potential
for open space and recreation opportunities in the facilities
planning area. This evaluation is intended to be brief and
concise and should draw on existing information from EPA, State
agencies, regional planning agencies, areawide water quality
management agencies, and the Step 1 grantee. The Step 1 grantee
should submit this information to EPA or a delegated State at the
earliest possible time during facilities planning to allow EPA to
determine if the action is eligible for a categorical exclusion.
The evaluation and any additional analysis deemed necessary by
the responsible official may be used by EPA to determine whether
the action is eligible for a categorical exclusion from the
substantive environmental review requirements of this part. If a
categorical exclusion is granted, the grantee will not be
required to prepare a formal EID nor will the responsible
official be required to prepare an environmental assessment under
NEPA. If an action is not granted a categorical exclusion, this
evaluation may be used to determine the scope of the EID required
of the grantee. This information can also be used to make an
early determination of the need for partitioning the
environmental review or for an EIS. Whenever possible, the Step 1
grantee should discuss this initial evaluation with both the
delegated State and EPA.
(2) A review of environmental information developed by the
grantee should be conducted by the responsible official whenever
meetings are held to assess the progress of facilities plan
development. These meetings should be held after completion of
the majority of the EID document and before a preferred
alternative is selected. Since any required EIS must be completed
before the approval of a facilities plan, a decision whether to
prepare an EIS is encouraged early during the facilities planning
process. These meetings may assist in this early determination.
EPA should inform interested parties of the following:
(i) The preliminary nature of the Agency's position on
preparing an EIS;
(ii) The relationship between the facilities planning and
environmental review processes;
(iii) The desirability of public input; and
(iv) A contact person for further information.
(c) Projects not receiving grant assistance for Step 1
facilities planning on or before December 29, 1981. Potential
Step 3 or Step 2+3 grant applicants should, in accordance with
A3-2 9
-------
35.2030(c), consult with EPA and the State early in the
facilities planning process to determine the appropriateness of a
categorical exclusion, the scope of an EID, or the
appropriateness of the early preparation of an environmental
assessment or an EIS. The consultation would be most useful
during the evaluation of project alternatives prior to the
selection of a preferred alternative to assist in resolving any
identified environmental problems.
Sect. 6.505: Categorical exclusions.
(a) General. At the request of an existing Step 1 facilities
planning grantee or of a potential Step 3 or Step 2+3 grant
applicant, the responsible official, as provided for in 6.107(b),
6.400(f) and 6.504(a), shall determine from existing information
and document whether an action is consistent with the categories
eligible for exclusion from NEPA review identified in 6.107(d) or
6.505(b) and not inconsistent with the criteria in 6.107(e) or
6.505(c).
(b) Specialized categories of actions eligible for exclusion.
For this subpart, eligible actions consist of any of the
categories in 6.107(d), or:
(1) Actions for which the facilities planning is consistent
with the category listed in 6.107(d)(1) which do not affect the
degree of treatment or capacity of the existing facility
including, but not limited to, infiltration and inflow
corrections, grant-eligible replacement of existing mechanical
equipment or structures, and the construction of small structures
on existing sites;
(2) Actions in sewered communities of less than 10,000 persons
which are for minor upgrading and minor expansion of existing
treatment works. This category does not include actions that
directly or indirectly involve the extension of new collection
systems funded with federal or other sources of funds;
(3) Actions in unsewered communities of less than 10,000
persons where on-site technologies are proposed; or
(4) Other actions are developed in accordance with 6.107(f).
(c) Specialized Criteria for not granting a categorical
exclusion. (1) The full environmental review procedures 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 criteria listed in 6.107(e) or when:
(i) The facilities to be provided will (A) create a new, or (B)
relocate an existing, discharge to surface or ground waters;
(ii) The facilities will result in substantial increases in the
volume of discharge or the loading of pollutants from an existing
A3-30
-------
source or from new facilities to receiving waters; or
(iii) The facilities would provide capacity to serve a
population 30% greater than the existing population.
(d) Proceeding with grant awards. (l) After a categorical
exclusion on a proposed treatment works has been granted, and
notices published in accordance with 6.400(f), grant awards may
proceed without being subject to any further environmental review
requirements 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.
(2) For all categorical exclusion determinations:
(i) 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, environmental conditions and public views
and, prior to grant award, either:
(A) Reaffirm - issue a public notice reaffirming EPA's
decision to proceed with the project without need for any further
environmental review;
(B) Supplement - update the information in the decision
document on the categorically excluded project and prepare,
issue, and distribute a revised notice in accordance with
6.107(f); or
(C) Reassess - revoke the categorical exclusion in accordance
with 6.107(c) and require a complete environmental review to
determine the need for an EIS in accordance with 6.506, followed
by preparation, issuance and distribution of an EA/FNSI 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 35.2202(b) of this title, assess
whether the environmental conditions or the project's anticipated
impact on the environment have changed and, prior to plans and
specifications approval, advise the Regional Administrator if
additional environmental review is necessary.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985 and 51 FR 32611, Sept. 12, 1986]
Sect. 6.506: Environmental review process.
(a) Review of completed facilities plans. The responsible
official shall ensure a review of the completed facilities plan
with particular attention to the EID and its utilization in the
development of alternatives and the selection of a preferred
alternative. An adequate EID shall be an integral part of any
A3-31
-------
facilities plan submitted to EPA or to a State. The EID shall be
of sufficient scope to enable the responsible official to make
determinations on requests for partitioning the environmental
review process in accordance with 6.507 and for preparing
environmental assessments in accordance with 6.506(b).
(b) Environmental assessment. The environmental assessment
process shall cover all potentially significant environmental
impacts. The responsible official shall prepare a preliminary
environmental assessment on which to base a recommendation to
finalize and issue the environmental assessment/FNSI. For those
States delegated environmental review responsibilities under
6.514, the State responsible official shall prepare the
preliminary environmental assessment in sufficient detail to
serve as an adequate basis for EPA's independent NEPA review and
decision to finalize and issue an environmental assessment/FNSI
or to prepare and issue a notice of intent for an EIS/ROD. The
EPA also may require submission of supplementary information
before the facilities plan is approved if needed for its
independent review of the State's preliminary assessment for
compliance with environmental review requirements. Substantial
requests for supplementary information 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 reviewed by the responsible
official to identify potentially significant environmental
concerns and their associated potential impacts, and the
responsible official shall furthermore address these concerns and
impacts in the environmental assessment:
(1) Description of the existing environment. For the
delineated facilities planning area, the existing environmental
conditions relevant to the analysis of alternatives, or to
determining the environmental impacts of the proposed action,
shall be considered.
(2) Description of the future environment 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
particular emphasis on existing public health or water quality
problems and their severity and extent.
(4) Documentation. Citations to information used to describe
the existing environment and to assess future environmental
impacts should be clearly referenced and documented. These
sources should include, as appropriate but not limited to, local,
tribal, regional, State, and federal agencies as well as public
and private organizations and institutions with responsibility or
interest in the types of conditions listed in 6.509 and in
Subpart C of this part.
A3-32
-------
(5) Analysis of alternatives. This discussion shall include a
comparative analysis of feasible alternatives, including the no
action alternative, throughout the study area. The alternatives
shall be screened with respect to capital and operating costs;
direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects; physical,
legal, or institutional constraints; and compliance with
regulatory requirements. Special attention should given to: the
environmental consequences of long-term, irreversible, 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 reasons for
rejecting any alternatives shall be presented in addition to any
significant environmental benefits precluded by rejection of an
alternative. The analysis should consider when relevant to the
project:
(i) Flow and waste reduction measures, including
infiltration/inflow reduction and pretreatment requirements;
(ii) Appropriate water conservation measures;
(iii) Alternative locations, capacities, and construction
phasing of facilities;
(iv) Alternative waste management techniques, including
pretreatment, treatment and discharge, wastewater reuse, land
application, and individual systems;
(v) Alternative methods for management of sludge, other
residual materials, including utilization options such as land
application, composting, and conversion of sludge for marketing
as a soil conditioner or fertilizer;
(vi) Improving effluent quality through more efficient
operation and maintenance;
(vii) Appropriate energy reduction measures; and
(viii) Multiple use including recreation, other open space, and
environmental education.
(6) Evaluating environmental consequences of proposed action.
A full range of relevant impacts of the proposed action shall be
discussed, including measures to mitigate adverse impacts, any
irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources to the
project and the relationship between local short-term uses of the
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term
productivity. Any specific requirements, including grant
conditions and areawide waste treatment management plan
requirements, should be identified and referenced. 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 requirements be included with the
facilities plan. Such requirements should be discussed whenever
A3-33
-------
meetings are held with Step 1 grantees or potential Step 3 or
Step 2 + 3 applicants.
(7) Minimizing adverse effects of the proposed action. (i)
Structural and nonstructural measures, directly or indirectly
related to the facilities plan, to mitigate or eliminate adverse
effects on the human and natural environments, shall be
identified during the environmental review. Among other measures,
structural provisions 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 regulations.
(ii) The EPA shall not accept a facilities plan, nor award
grant assistance for its implementation, if the applicant/grantee
has not made, or agreed to make, changes in the project, in
accordance with determinations made in a FNSI based on its
supporting 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 with such environmental review
determinations.
(c) FNSI/EIS determination. The responsible official shall
apply the criteria under 6.509 to the following:
(1) A complete facilities plan;
(2) The EID;
(3) The preliminary environmental assessment; and
(4) Other documentation, deemed necessary by the responsible
official adequate to make an EIS determination by EPA. Where EPA
determines that an EIS is to be prepared, there is no need to
prepare a formal environmental assessment. If EPA or the State
identifies deficiencies in the EID, preliminary environmental
assessment, or other supporting documentation, 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 determination to issue a FNSI or to
prepare an EIS shall constitute final Agency action, and shall
not be subject to administrative review under 40 CFR Part 3 0
Subpart L.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32612, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.507: Partitioning the environmental review process.
(a) Purpose. Under certain circumstances the building of a
component/portion of a wastewater treatment system may be
justified in advance of completing all NEPA requirements for the
A3-34
-------
remainder of the system(s). When there are overriding
considerations of cost or impaired program effectiveness, 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 discrete component
shall comply with the criteria and procedures described in
paragraph (b) of this section. In addition, all reasonable
alternatives for the overall wastewater treatment works system(s)
of which the component is a part shall have been previously
identified, and each part of the environmental review for the
remainder of the overall facilities system(s) in the planning
area in accordance with 6.502(b)(3) shall comply with all
requirements under 6.506.
(b) Criteria for partitioning. (1) Projects may be
partitioned under the following circumstances:
(1) To overcome impaired program effectiveness, the project
component, in addition to meeting the criteria listed in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, 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 component (such
as major pieces of equipment, portions of conveyances or small
structures) in addition to meeting the criteria listed in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, must achieve a cost savings to
the federal government and/or to the grantee's or potential
grantee's overall costs incurred in procuring the wastewater
treatment component(s) and/or the installation of other related
public works projects funded in coordination with other federal,
State, tribal or local agencies.
(2) The project component also must:
(i) Not foreclose any reasonable alternatives identified for
the overall wastewater treatment works system(s);
(ii) Not cause significant adverse direct or indirect
environmental impacts including those which cannot be acceptably
mitigated without completing the entire wastewater treatment
system of which the component is a part; and
(iii) Not be highly controversial.
(c) Requests for partitioning. The applicant's or State's
request for partitioning must contain the following:
(1) A description of the discrete component proposed for
construction before completing the environmental review of the
entire facilities plan;
(2) How the component meets the above criteria;
A3-3 5
-------
(3) The environmental information required by 6.506 of this
subpart for the component; and
(4) Any preliminary information that may be important to EPA in
an EIS determination for the entire facilities plan (6.509).
(d) Approval of requests for partitioning. The responsible
official shall:
(1) Review the request for partitioning against all
requirements of this subpart;
(2) If approvable, prepare and issue a FNSI in accordance with
6.508;
(3) Include a grant condition prohibiting the building of
additional or different components of the entire facilities
system(s) in the planning area as described in 6.502(b)(3)(i).
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32612, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.508: Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI)
determination.
(a) Criteria for producing and distributing FNSIs. If, after
completion of the environmental review, EPA determines that an
EIS will not be required, the responsible official shall issue a
FNSI in accordance with 6.105(f) and 6.400(d). The FNSI will be
based on EPA's independent review of the preliminary
environmental assessment and any other environmental information
deemed necessary by the responsible official consistent with the
requirements of 6.506(c). Following the Agency's independent
review, the environmental assessment will be finalized and either
be incorporated into, or attached to, the FNSI. The FNSI shall
list all mitigation measures as defined in 1508.20 of this title,
and specifically identify those mitigation measures necessary to
make the recommended alternative environmentally acceptable.
(b) Proceeding with grant awards. (1) Once an environmental
assessment has been prepared and the issued FNSI becomes
effective for the treatment works within the study area, grant
awards may proceed without preparation of additional FNSIs,
unless the responsible official later determines that the project
or environmental conditions have changed significantly from that
which underwent environmental review.
(2) For all environmental assessment/FNSI determinations:
(i) 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, environmental conditions and public views
and, prior to grant award, either:
A3-3 6
-------
(A) Reaffirm - issue a public notice reaffirming EPA's
decision to proceed with the project without revising the
environmental assessment;
(B) Supplement - update information and prepare, issue and
distribute a revised EA/FNSI in accordance with 6.105(f) and
6.400(d); or
(C) Reassess - withdraw the FNSI and publish a notice of
intent to produce an EIS followed by the preparation, issuance
and distribution of the 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 35.2202(b) of this title, assess
whether the environmental conditions or the project's anticipated
impact on the environment have changed and, prior to plans and
specifications approval, advise the Regional Administrator if
additional environmental review is necessary.
[51 FR 32612, Sept. 12, 1986]
Sect. 6.509: Criteria for initiating Environmental Impact
Statements (EIS).
(a) Conditions requiring EISs. (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 6.108 to exist, or when
(2) The treated effluent is being discharged 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 quality or quantity to meet
the requirements of these uses.
(b) Other conditions. The responsible official shall also
consider preparing an EIS if: The project is highly
controversial; the project in conjunction 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.
Sect. 6.510: Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation.
(a) Steps in preparing EISs. In addition to the requirements
specified in Subparts A, B, C, and D of this part, the
responsible official will conduct the following activities:
(1) Notice of intent. If a determination is made that an EIS
will be required, the responsible official shall prepare and
A3-3 7
-------
distribute a notice of intent as required in 6.105(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 scoping
meeting must be made in accordance with 6.400(a) and 40 CFR
1506.6(b). As part of the scoping meeting EPA, in cooperation
with any delegated State, will as a minimum:
(i) Determine the significance of issues for and the scope of
those significant 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
information or analyses that may be needed from cooperating
agencies or other parties;
(iv) Discuss the method for EIS preparation and the public
participation strategy;
(v) Identify consultation requirements of other environmental
laws, in accordance with Subpart C; and
(vi) Determine the relationship between the EIS and the
completion of the facilities plan and any necessary coordination
arrangements between the preparers of both documents.
(3) Identifying and evaluating alternatives. Immediately
following the scoping process, the responsible official shall
commence the identification and evaluation of all potentially
viable alternatives to adequately address the range of issues
identified in the scoping process. Additional issues may be
addressed, or others eliminated, during this process and the
reasons documented as part of the EIS.
(b) Methods for preparing EISs. 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;
(2) By EPA contracting directly with a qualified consulting
firm;
(3) By utilizing a third party method, whereby the responsible
official enters into **third party agreements11 for the applicant
to engage and pay for the services of a third party contractor to
prepare the EIS. Such agreement shall not be initiated unless
both the applicant and the responsible official agree to its
creation. A third party agreement will be established prior to
A3-38
-------
the applicant's EID and eliminate the need for that document. In
proceeding under the third party agreement, the responsible
official shall carry out the following practices:
(i) In consultation with the applicant, choose the third party
contractor and manage that contract;
(ii) Select the consultant based on 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 financial or other conflicting
interest in the outcome of the project; and
(iii) Specify the information to be developed and supervise the
gathering, analysis and presentation of the information. The
responsible official shall have sole authority for approval and
modification of the statements, analyses, and conclusions
included in the third party EIS; or
(4) By utilizing a joint EPA/State process on projects within
States which have requirements and procedures comparable to NEPA,
whereby the EPA and the State agree to prepare a single EIS
document to fulfill both federal and State requirements. Both EPA
and the State shall sign a Memorandum of Agreement which includes
the responsibilities and procedures to be used by both parties
for the preparation of the EIS as provided for in 40 CFR
1506.2(c).
Sect. 6.511: Record of Decision (ROD) for EISs and
identification of mitigation measures.
(a) Record of Decision. After a final EIS has been issued,
the responsible official shall prepare and issue a ROD in
accordance with 4 0 CFR 1505.2 prior to, or in conjunction with,
the approval of the facilities plan. The ROD shall include
identification of mitigation measures derived from the EIS
process including grant conditions which are necessary to
minimize the adverse impacts of the selected alternative.
(b) Specific mitigation measures. Prior to the approval of a
facilities plan, the responsible official must ensure that
effective mitigation measures identified in the ROD will be
implemented by the grantee. This should be done by revising the
facilities plan, initiating other steps to mitigate adverse
effects, or including conditions in grants requiring actions to
minimize effects. Care should be exercised if a condition is to
be imposed in a grant document to assure that the applicant
possesses the authority to fulfill the conditions.
(c) Proceeding with grant awards. (1) Once the ROD has been
prepared on the selected, or preferred, alternative(s) for the
treatment works described within the EIS, grant awards may
proceed without the preparation of supplemental EISs unless the
responsible official later determines that the project or the
A3-39
-------
environmental conditions described within the current EIS have
changed significantly from the previous environmental review in
accordance with 1502.9(c) of this title.
(2) For all EIS/ROD determinations:
(i) 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, environmental conditions and public views
and, prior to grant award, either:
(A) Reaffirm - issue a public notice reaffirming EPA's
decision to proceed with the project, and documenting that no
additional significant impacts were identified during the re-
evaluation which would require supplementing the EIS; or
(B) Supplement - conduct additional studies and prepare, issue
and distribute a supplemental EIS in accordance with 6.404 and
document the original, or any revised, decision in an addendum to
the 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 35.2202(b) of this title, assess
whether the environmental conditions or the project's anticipated
impact on the environment have changed, and prior to plans and
specifications approval, advise the Regional Administrator if
additional environmental review is necessary.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32613, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.512: Monitoring for compliance.
(a) General. The responsible official shall ensure adequate
monitoring of mitigation measures and other grant conditions
identified in the FNSI, or ROD.
(b) Enforcement . If the grantee fails to comply with grant
conditions, the responsible official may consider applying any of
the sanctions specified in 40 CFR 30.900.
Sect. 6.513: 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 participation steps be achieved before
the State and EPA complete the environmental review process. As a
minimum, all potential applicants that do not qualify for a
categorical exclusion shall conduct the following steps in
accordance with procedures specified in Part 25 of this title:
(1) One public meeting when alternatives have been developed,
A3-40
-------
but before an alternative has been selected, to discuss all
alternatives under consideration and the reasons for rejection of
others; and
(2) One public hearing prior to formal adoption of a facilities
plan to discuss the proposed facilities plan and any needed
mitigation measures.
(b) Coordination. Public participation activities undertaken
in connection with the environmental review process should be
coordinated with any other applicable public participation
program wherever possible.
(c) Scope. The requirements of 40 CFR 6.400 shall be
fulfilled, and consistent with 40 CFR 1506.6, the responsible
official may institute such additional NEPA-related public
participation procedures as are deemed necessary during the
environmental review process.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32613, Sept.
12, 1986]
Sect. 6.514: Delegation to States.
(~) General. Authority delegated to the State under section
205(g) of the Clean Water Act to review a facilities plan may
include all EPA activities under this part except for the
following:
(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 preliminary environmental
assessment;
(4) Finalizing the scope of an environmental assessment, and
finalization, approval and issuance of a final environmental
assessment;
(5) Determination to issue, and issuance of, a FNSI based on a
completed (6.508) or partitioned (6.507(d)(2)) environmental
review;
(~) Determination to issue, and issuance of, a notice of intent
for preparing an EIS;
(7) Preparation of EISs under 6.510(b) (1) and (2), final
decisions required for preparing an EIS under 6.510(b)(3),
finalizing the agreement to prepare an EIS under 6.510(b)(4),
finalizing the scope of an EIS, and issuance of draft, final and
A3-41
-------
supplemental EISs;
(8) Preparation and issuance of the ROD based on an EIS;
(9) Final decisions under other applicable laws described in
subpart C of this part;
(10) Determination following re-evaluations of projects
awaiting grant funding in the case of Step 3 projects whose
existing evaluations and/or decision documents are five or more
years old, or determinations following re-evaluations on projects
submitted for plans and specifications review and approval in the
case of awarded Step 2+3 projects where the EPA Regional
Administrator has been advised that additional environmental
review is necessary, in accordance with 6.505(d)(2),
6.508 (b)(2) or 6.511(c)(2); and
(11) Maintenance of official EPA monthly status reports as
required under 6.402(b).
(b) 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 consideration shall be given to eliminating duplication
in accordance with 1506.2 of this title. Where there are State
or local procedures comparable to NEPA, EPA should enter into
memoranda of understanding with these States concerning workload
distribution and responsibilities not specifically reserved to
EPA in paragraph (a) of this section for implementing the
environmental review and facilities planning process.
[50 FR 26317, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32613, Sept.
12, 1986]
APPENDIX A - STATEMENT OF PROCEDURES ON FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
AND WETLANDS PROTECTION
Contents:
Section 1 General
Section 2 Purpose
Section 3 Policy
Section 4 Definitions
Section 5 Applicability
Section 6 Requirements
Section 7 Implementation
Section 1 General
a. Executive Order 11988 entitled "Floodplain Management"
dated May 24, 1977, requires Federal agencies to evaluate the
potential effects of actions it may take in a floodplain to avoid
A3-42
-------
adversely impacting floodplains wherever possible, to ensure that
its planning programs and budget requests reflect consideration
of flood hazards and floodplain management, including the
restoration and preservation of such land areas as natural
undeveloped floodplains, and to prescribe procedures to implement
the policies and procedures of this Executive Order. Guidance for
implementation of the Executive Order has been provided by the
U.S. Water Resources Council in its Floodplain Management
Guidelines dated February 10, 1978 (see 40 FR 6030) .
b. Executive Order 11990 entitled "Protection of Wetlands",
dated May 24, 1977, requires Federal agencies to take action to
avoid adversely impacting wetlands wherever possible, to minimize
wetlands destruction and to preserve the values of wetlands, and
to prescribe procedures to implement the policies and procedures
of this Executive Order.
c. It is the intent of these Executive Orders that, wherever
possible, Federal agencies implement the floodplains/wetlands
requirements through existing procedures, such as those internal
procedures established to implement the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) and 0MB A-95 review procedures. In those
instances where the environmental impacts of a proposed action
are not significant enough to require an environmental impact
statement (EIS) pursuant to section 102(2) (C) 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 Procedures is to set forth
Agency policy and guidance for carrying out the provisions of
Executive Orders 11988 and 11990.
b. EPA program offices shall amend existing regulations and
procedures to incorporate the policies and procedures set forth
in this Statement of Procedures.
c. To the extent possible, EPA shall accommodate the
requirements of Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 through the
Agency NEPA procedures contained in 40 CFR Part 6.
Section 3 Policy
a. The Agency shall avoid wherever possible the long and short
term impacts associated with the destruction of wetlands and the
occupancy and modification of floodplains and wetlands, and avoid
direct and indirect support of floodplain and wetlands
development wherever there is a practicable alternative.
A3-4 3
-------
b. The Agency shall incorporate floodplain management goals and
wetlands protection considerations into its planning, regulatory,
and decisionmaking processes. It shall also promote the
preservation and restoration of floodplains so that their natural
and beneficial values can be realized. To the extent possible EPA
shall:
(1) Reduce the hazard and risk of flood loss and wherever it is
possible to avoid direct or indirect adverse impact on
floodplains;
(2) Where there is no practical alternative to locating in a
floodplain, minimize the impact of floods on human safety,
health, and welfare, as well as the natural environment;
(3) Restore and preserve natural and beneficial values served by
floodplains;
(4) Require the construction of EPA structures and facilities to
be in accordance with the standards and criteria, of the
regulations promulgated pursuant to the National Flood Insurance
Program;
(5) Identify floodplains which require restoration and
preservation and recommend management programs necessary to
protect these floodplains and to include such considerations as
part of on-going planning programs; and
(6) Provide the public with early and continuing information
concerning floodplain management and with opportunities for
participating in decision making including the (evaluation of)
tradeoffs among competing alternatives.
c. The Agency shall incorporate wetlands protection
considerations into its planning, regulatory, and decisionmaking
processes. It shall minimize the destruction, loss, or
degradation of wetlands and preserve and enhance the natural and
beneficial values of wetlands. Agency activities shall continue
to be carried out consistent with the Administrator's Decision
Statement No. 4 dated February 21, 1973 entitled "EPA Policy to
Protect the Nation's Wetlands."
Section 4 Definitions
a. "Base Flood" means that flood which has a one percent
chance of occurrence in any given year (also known as a 100-year
flood). This term is used in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) to indicate the minimum level of flooding to be used by a
community in its floodplain management regulations.
b. "Base Floodplain" means the land area covered by a 100-year
flood (one percent chance floodplain). Also see definition of
floodplain.
A3-44
-------
c. "Flood or Flooding" means a general and temporary condition
of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from
the overflow of inland and/or tidal waters, and/or the unusual
and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any
source, or flooding from any other source.
d. "Floodplain" means the lowland and relatively flat areas
adjoining inland and coastal waters and other floodprone areas
such as offshore islands, including at a minimum, that area
subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any
given year. The base floodplain shall be used to designate the
100-year floodplain (one percent chance floodplain). The critical
action floodplain is defined as the 500-year floodplain (0.2
percent chance floodplain).
e. "Floodproofing" means modification of individual structures
and facilities, their sites, and their contents to protect
against structural failure, to keep water out or to reduce
effects of water entry.
f. "Minimize" means to reduce to the smallest possible amount
or degree.
g. "Practicable" means capable of being done within existing
constraints. The test of what is practicable depends upon the
situation and includes consideration of the pertinent factors
such as environment, community welfare, cost, or technology.
h. "Preserve" means to prevent modification to the natural
floodplain environment or to maintain it as closely as possible
to its natural state.
i. "Restore" means to re-establish a setting or environment in
which the natural functions of the floodplain can again operate.
j. "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated 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 seasonally
saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such
as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats,
and natural ponds.
Section 5 Applicability
a. The Executive Orders apply to activities of Federal agencies
pertaining to (1) acquiring, managing, and disposing of Federal
lands and facilities, (2) providing Federally undertaken,
financed, or assisted construction and improvements, and (3)
conducting Federal activities and programs affecting land use,
including but not limited to water and related land resources
planning, regulating, and licensing activities.
A3-4 5
-------
b. These procedures shall apply to EPA's programs as follows:
(1) All Agency actions involving construction of facilities or
management of lands or property. This will require amendment of
the EPA Facilities Management Manual (October 1973 and revisions
thereafter).
(2) All Agency actions where the NEPA process applies. This
would include the programs under sections 306/402 of the Clean
Water Act pertaining to new source permitting and section 201 of
the Clean Water Act pertaining to wastewater treatment
construction grants.
(3) All agency actions where there is sufficient independent
statutory authority to carry out the floodplain/wetlands
procedures.
(4) In program areas where there is no EIS requirement nor clear
statutory authority for EPA to require procedural implementation,
EPA shall continue to provide leadership and offer guidance so
that the value of floodplain management and wetlands protection
can be understood and carried out to the maximum extent
practicable in these programs.
c. These procedures shall not apply to any permitting or source
review programs of EPA once such authority has been transferred
or delegated to a State. However, EPA shall, to the extent
possible, require States to provide equivalent effort to assure
support for the objectives of these procedures as part of the
state assumption process.
Section 6 Requirements
a. Floodplain/Wetlands review of proposed Agency actions.
(1)Floodplain/Wetlands Determination — Before undertaking an
Agency action, each program office must determine whether or not
the action will be located in or affect a floodplain or wetlands.
The Agency shall utilize maps prepared by the Federal Insurance
Administration of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Flood
Insurance Rate Maps or Flood Hazard Boundary Maps), Fish and
Wildlife Service (National Wetlands Inventory Maps), and other
appropriate agencies to determine whether a proposed action is
located in or will likely affect a floodplain or wetlands. If
there is no floodplain/wetlands impact identified, the action may
proceed without further consideration of the remaining procedures
set forth below.
(2)Early Public Notice — When it is apparent that a proposed or
potential agency action is likely to impact a floodplain or
wetlands, the public should be informed through appropriate
public notice procedures.
A3-4 6
-------
(3) Floodplain/Wetlands Assessment — If the Agency determines a
proposed action is located in or affects a floodplain or
wetlands, a floodplain/wetlands assessment shall be undertaken.
For those actions where an environmental assessment (EA) or
environmental impact statement (EIS) is prepared pursuant to 40
CFR Part 6, the floodplain/wetlands assessment shall be prepared
concurrently with these analyses and shall be included in the EA
or EIS. In all other cases, a **floodplain/wetlands assessment1•
shall be prepared. Assessments shall consist of a description of
the proposed action, a discussion of its effect on the
floodplain/wetlands, and shall also describe the alternatives
considered.
(4) Public Review of Assessments — For proposed actions impacting
floodplain/wetlands where an EA or EIS is prepared, the
opportunity for public review will be provided through the EIS
provisions contained in 40 CFR Parts 6, 25, or 35, where
appropriate. In other cases, an equivalent public notice of the
floodplain/wetlands assessment shall be made consistent with the
public involvement requirements of the applicable program.
(5) Minimize, Restore or Preserve — If there is no practicable
alternative to locating in or affecting the floodplain or
wetlands, the Agency shall act to minimize potential harm to the
floodplain or wetlands. The Agency shall also act to restore and
preserve the natural and beneficial values of floodplains and
wetlands as part of the analysis of all alternatives under
consideration.
(6) Agency Decision — After consideration of alternative actions,
as 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 floodplain/wetlands, the Agency
shall provide further public notice announcing this decision.
This decision shall be accompanied by a Statement of Findings,
not to exceed three pages. This Statement shall include: (i) The
reasons why the proposed action must be located in or affect the
floodplain or wetlands; (ii) a description of significant facts
considered in making the decision to locate in or affect the
floodplain or wetlands including alternative sites and actions;
(iii) a statement indicating whether the proposed action conforms
to applicable State or local floodplain protection standards;
(iv) a description of the steps taken to design or modify the
proposed action to minimize potential harm to or within the
floodplain or wetlands; and (v) a statement indicating how the
proposed action affects the natural or beneficial values of the
floodplain or wetlands. If the provisions of 40 CFR Part 6 apply,
the Statement of Findings may be incorporated in the final EIS or
in the environmental assessment. In other cases, notice should be
placed in the Federal Register or other local medium and copies
sent to Federal, State, and local agencies and other entities
which submitted comments or are otherwise concerned with the
floodplain/wetlands assessment. For floodplain actions subject to
Office of Management and Budget (0MB) Circular A-95, the Agency
shall send the Statement of Findings to State and areawide A-95
A3 - 47
-------
clearinghouse in the geographic area affected. At least 15
working days shall be allowed for public and interagency review
of the Statement of Findings.
(7) Authorizations/Appropriations — Any requests for new
authorizations or appropriations transmitted to OMB shall
include, a floodplain/wetlands assessment and, for floodplain
impacting actions, a Statement of Findings, if a proposed action
will be located in a floodplain 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 appendix. Therefore,
when EPA and another Federal agency have related actions, EPA
shall work with the other agency to identify which agency shall
take the lead in satisfying these procedural requirements and
thereby avoid duplication of efforts.
c. Additional floodplain management provisions relating to
Federal property and facilities.
(1) Construction Activities — EPA controlled structures and
facilities must be constructed in accordance with existing
criteria and standards set forth under the NFIP and must include
mitigation of adverse impacts wherever feasible. Deviation from
these requirements may occur only to the extent NFIP standards
are demonstrated as inappropriate for a given structure or
facility.
(2) Flood Protection Measures — If newly constructed structures
or facilities are to be located in a floodplain, accepted
floodproofing and other flood protection measures shall be
undertaken. To achieve flood protection, EPA shall, wherever
practicable, elevate structures above the base flood level rather
than filling land.
(3) Restoration and Preservation — As part of any EPA plan or
action, the potential for restoring and preserving floodplains
and wetlands so that their natural and beneficial values can be
realized must be considered and incorporated into the plan or
action wherever feasible.
(4) Property Used by Public — If property used by the public has
suffered damage or is located in an identified flood hazard area,
EPA shall provide on structures, and other places where
appropriate, conspicuous indicators of past and probable flood
height to enhance public knowledge of flood hazards.
(5) Transfer of EPA Property — When property in flood plains is
proposed for 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 floodplain regulations and attach other restrictions to
uses of the property as may be deemed appropriate.
Notwithstanding, EPA shall consider withholding such properties
A3-48
-------
from conveyance.
Section 7 Implementation
a. Pursuant to section 2, the EPA program offices shall amend
existing regulations, procedures, and guidance, as appropriate,
to incorporate the policies and procedures set forth in this
Statement of Procedures. Such amendments shall be made within six
months of the date of these Procedures.
b. The Office of External Affairs (OEA) is responsible for the
oversight of the implementation of this Statement of Procedures
and shall be given advanced opportunity to review amendments to
regulations, procedures, and guidance. OEA shall coordinate
efforts with the program offices to develop necessary manuals and
more specialized supplementary guidance to carry out this
Statement of Procedures.
[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1976, as amended at 50 FR 26323, June 25,
1985]
A3-49
-------
APPENDIX A4
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11988
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
-------
APPENDIX
Floodplain Management
Statement by the Preiident Accompanying Executive
Order 11988. May 24, 1977
The floodplains which adjoin the Nation's inland and
coastal waters have long been recognized as having spe-
cial values to our citizens. They have provided us with
wildlife habitat, agricultural and forest products, stable
ecosystems, and park and recreation areas. However, un-
wise use and development of our riverine, coastal, and
other floodplains not only destroy many of the special
qualities of these areas but pose a severe threat to human
life, health, and property.
Since the adoption of a national flood control policy
in 1936, the Federal Government has invested about $10
billion in flood protection works. Dccpite substantial ef-
forts by the Federal Government to redr.ee flood hazards
and protect floodplains, annual losses from floods and
adverse alteration of floodplains continue to increase.
The problem arise*, mainly from unwise land use prac-
tices. The Federal Government can lie responsible for or
ran influence these practices in jhe construction of proj-
ects, in the management of its own properties, in the provi-
sion of financial or technical assistance including support
of financial institutions, and in the uses for which its
agencies issue licenses or permits. In addition to minimiz-
ing the danger to human and nonhuman communities
living in floodplains, active floodplain management rep-
resents sound business practice by reducing the risk of
flood damage to properties benefiting from Federal
assistance.
Because unwise floodplain development can lead to
the loss of human and other natural resources, it is am-
ply a bad Federal investment and should be avoided. In
order to avoid to the extent possible the long- and short-
term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and
modification of floodplains and to avoid direct or indi-
rect support of floodplain development wherever there is a
practicable alternative, I have issued an Executive order
on floodplain management.
Floodplain Management
Executive Order 11988. May 24,1977
By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Consti-
tution and statutes of the United States of America, and
as President of the United States of America, in further-
ance of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4001 et
icq.), and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973
(Public Law 93-234, 87 Stat. 975), in order to avoid to
the extent possible the long and short term advene im-
pacts associated with the occupancy and modification of
floodplains and to avoid direct or indirect support of
floodplain development wherever there is a practicable
alternative, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Each Bgency shall provide leadership and
shall take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to mini-
mize the impact of floods on human safety, health and
welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and
beneficial values served by floodplains in carrying out its
responsibilities for (1) acquiring, managing, and disposing
of Federal lands and facilities; (2) providing Federally
undertaken, financed, or assisted construction and im-
provements; and (3) conducting Federal activities and
programs affecting land use, including but not limited to
water and related land resources planning, regulating,
and licensing activities.
Sec. 2. In carrying out the activities described in Sec-
tion 1 of this Order, each agency has a responsibility to
evaluate the potential effects of any actions it may take
in a floodplain; to ensure that its planning programs and
budget requests reflect consideration of flood hazards and
A4-1
-------
floodplain management; and to prescribe procedures to
implement the policies and requirements of thb Order,
as follows:
(a)(1) Before taking an action, each agency shall
determine whether the proposed action will occur in a
floodplain—for major Federal actions significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment, the eval-
uation required below will be included in any statement
prepared under Section 102(2) (C) of the National En-
vironmental Policy Act. This determination shall be made
according to a Department of Housing and Urban Devel-
opment (HUD) floodp'ain map or a more detailed map
of an area, if available. If such map* are not available,
the agency shall make a determination of the location of
the floodplain based on the best available information.
The Water Resources Council shall issue guidance on
this information not later than October 1, 1977.
(2) If an agency has determined to, or proposes to,
conduct, support, or allow an action to be located in a
floodplain, the agency shall consider alternatives to avoid
adverse effects and incompatible development in the
floodplains. If the head of the agency finds that the only
practicable alternative consistent with the law and with
the policy set forth in this Order requires siting in a flood-
plain, the agency shall, prior to taking action, (i) design
or modify its action in order to minimize potential harm
to or within the floodplain, consistent with regulations
issued in accord with Section 2(d) of this Order, and
(ii) prepare and circulate a notice containing an explana-
tion of why the action is proposed to be located in the
floodplain.
(3) For programs subject to the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget Circular A-95, the agency shall send
the notice, not to exceed three pages in length including
a location map, to the state and areawide A-95 clear-
inghouses for the geographic areas affected. The notice
shall include: (i) the reasons why the action is proposed
to be located in a floodplain; (ii) a statement indicating
whether the action conforms to applicable state or local
floodplain protection standards and (iii) a list of the
alternatives considered. Agencies shall endeavor to allow
a brief comment period prior to taking any action.
(4) Each agency shall also provide opportunity for
early public review of any plans or proposals for actions
in floodplains, in accordance with Section 2(b) of Execu-
tive Order No. 11514, as amended, including the devel-
opment of procedures to accomplish this objective for
Federal actions whose impact is not significant enough
to require the preparation of an environmental impact
statement under Section 102(2) (C) of the National En-
vironmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
(b) Any requests for new authorizations or appropria-
tions transmitted to the Office of Management and Budget
shall indicate, if an action to be proposed will be located
in a floodplain, whether the proposed action is in accord
with this Order.
(c) Each agency shall take floodplain management
into account when formulating or evaluating any water
and land use plans and shall require land and water re-
sources use appropriate to the degree of hazard involved.
Agencies shall include adequate provision for the evalua-
tion and consideration of flood hazards in the regula-
tions and operating procedures for the licenses, permits,
loan or grants-in-aid programs that they administer.
Agencies shall also encourage and provide appropriate
guidance to applicants to evaluate the effects of their
proposals in floodplains prior to submitting applications
for Federal licenses, permits, loans or grants.
(d) As allowed by law, each agency shall issue or
amend existing regulations and procedures within one
year to comply with this Order. These procedures shall
incorporate the Unified National Program for Flood-
plain Management of the Water Resources Council, and
shall explain the means that the agency will employ to
pursue the nonhazardous use of riverine, coastal and other
floodplains in connection with the activities under its au-
thority. To the extent possible, existing processes, such
as these of the Council on Environmental Quality and
the Water Resources Council, shall be utilized to fulfill
the requirements of this Order. Agencies shall prepare
their procedures in consultation with the Water Resources
Council, the Federal Insurance Administration, and the
Council on Environmental Quality, and shall update such
procedures as necessary.
Sec. 3. In addition to the requirements of Section 2,
agencies with responsibilities for Federal real property
and facilities shall take the following measures:
(a) The regulations and procedures established under
Section 2(d) of thb Order shall, at a minimum, require
the construction of Federal structures and facilities to be
in accordance with the standards and criteria and to be
consistent with the intent of those promulgated under
the National Flood Insurance Program. They shall deviate
only to the extent that the standards of the Flood Insur-
ance Program are demonstrably inappropriate for a given
type of structure or facility.
(b) If, after compliance with the requirements of this
Order, new construction of structures or facilities are to
be located in a floodplain, accepted floodproofing and
other flood protection measures shall be applied to new
construction or rehabilitation. To achieve flood protec-
tion, agencies shall, wherever practicable, elevate struc-
tures above the base flood level rather than filling in land.
(c) If property used by the general public has suffered
flood damage or is located in an identified flood hazard
area, the responsible agency shall provide on structures,
and other places where appropriate, conspicuous delin-
eation of past and probable flood height in order to en-
hance public awareness of and knowledge about flood
hazards.
(d) When property in floodplains is proposed for lease,
easement, right-of-way, or disposal to non-Federal public
or private parlies, the Federal agency shall (1) reference
in the conveyance those uses that are restricted under
A4-2
-------
identified Federal, State, or local flood plain regulations;
and (2) attach other appropriate restrictions to the uses
of properties by the grantee or purcha
-------
APPENDIX A5
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990
PROTECTION OF WETLANDS
-------
Appendix
Protection of Wetlands
Statement by the President Accompanying Executive
Order 11990. May 24, 1977
The Nation's coastal and inland wetlands are vital
natural resources of critical importance to the people of
this country. Wetlands are areas of great natural produc-
rivtrs, and habitat for fish and wildlife resources. Wet-
lands contribute to the production of agricultural prod-
ucts and timber, and provide recreational, scientific, and
aesthetic resources of national interest.
The unwise use and development of wetlands will de-
stroy many of their special qualities and important natural
functions. Recent estimates indicate that the United States
has already lost over 40 percent of our 120 million acres
of wetlands inventoried in the 1950's. This piecemeal
alteration and destruction of wetlands through draining,
dredging, filling, and other means has had an adverse
cumulative impact on our natural resources and on the
quality of human life.
tivity, hydrological utility, and environmental diversity,
providing natural flood control, improved water quality,
recharge of aquifers, flow stabilization of streams and
The problem of loss of wetlands arises mainly from
unwise land use practices. The Federal Government can
be responsible for or can influence these practices in the
construction of projects, in the management of its own
properties, and in the provisions of financial or technical
assistance.
In order to avoid to the extent possible the long and
short term adverse impacts associated with the destruc-
tion or modification of wetlands and to avoid direct or
indirect support of new construction in wetlands wher-
ever there is a practicable alternative, I have issued an
Executive order on the protection of wetlands.
Protection of Wetlands
Executive Order 11990. May 24,1977
By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitu-
tion and statutes of the United States of America, and
as President of the United States of America, in further-
ance of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et stq.), in order to avoid
to the extent possible the long and short term adverse
impacts associated with the destruction or modification of
wetlands and to avoid direct or indirect support of new
construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable
alternative, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. (a) Each agency shall provide leadership
and shall take action to minimize the destruction, loss or
degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the
natural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out
the agency's responsibilities for (1) acquiring, managing,
and disposing of Federal lands and facilities; and (2)
providing Federally undertaken, financed, or assisted
construction and improvements; and (3) conducting
Federal activities and programs affecting land use, includ-
ing but not limited to water and related land resources
planning, regulating, and licensing activities.
(b) This Order docs not apply to the issuance by Fed-
eral agencies of permits, licenses, or allocations to private
parties for activities involving wetlands on non-Federal
property.
Sec. 2.(a) In furtherance of Section 101 (b) (3) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4331(b)(3)) to improve and coordinate Federal plans,
functions, programs and resources to the end that die
Nation may attain the widest range of beneficial uses of
the environment without degradation and risk to health
or safety, each agency, to the extent permitted by law,
shall avoid undertaking or providing assistance for new
construction located in wetlands unless the head of the
agency finds (I) that there is no practicable alternative
to such construction, and (2) that the proposed action
includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to
wetlands which may result from such use. In making this
finding the head of the agency may take into account
economic, environmental and other pertinent factors.
(b) Each agency shall also provide opportunity for
early public review of any plans or proposals for new con-
struction in wetlands, in accordance with Section 2(b) of
Executive Order No. 11514, as amended, including the
development of procedures to accomplish this objective
for Federal actions whos
-------
to require the preparation of an environmental impact
statement under Section 102(2) (C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
Sec. 3. Any requests for new authorizations or appro-
priations transmitted to the Office of Management and
Budget shall indicate, if an action to be proposed will be
located in wetlands, whether the proposed action is in ac-
cord with this Order.
Sec. 4. When Federally-owned wetlands or portions of
wetlands are proposed for lease, easement, right-of-way or
disposal to non-Federal public or private parties, the Fed-
eral agency shall (a) reference in the conveyance those
uses that are restricted under identified Federal, State or
local wetlands regulations; and (b) attach other appro-
priate restrictions to the uses of properties by the grantee
or purchaser and any successor, except where prohibited
by law; or (c) withhold such properties from disposal.
Sec. 5. In carrying out the activities described in Sec-
tion 1 of tnis Order, each agency shall consider facton
relevant to a proposal's effect on the survival and quality
of the wetlands. Among these factors are:
(a) public health, safety, and welfare, including water
supply, quality, recharge and discharge; pollution; flood
and storm hazards; and sediment and erosion;
(b) maintenance of natural systems, including con-
servation and long term productivity of existing flora and
fauna, species and habitat diversity and stability, hydro-
logic utility, fish, wildlife, timber, and food and fiber
resources; and
(c) other uses of wetlands in the public interest, in-
cluding recreational, scientific, and cultural uses.
Sec. 6. As allowed by law, agencies shall issue or amend
their existing procedures in order to comply with this
Order. To the extent possible, existing processes, such as
these of the Council on Environmental Quality and the
Water Resources Council, shall be utilized to fulfill the
requirements of this Order.
Sec. 7. As used in this Order:
(a) The term "agency" shall have the same meaning
as the term "Executive agency" in Section 105 of Title 5
of the United States Code and shall include the military
departments; the directives contained in this Order, how-
ever, are meant to apply only to those agencies which
perform the activities described in Section 1 which are
located in or affecting wetlands.
(b) The term "new construction" shall include drain-
ing, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, impounding,
and re'ated activities and any structures or facilities begun
or authorized after the effective date of this Order.
(c) The term "wetlands" means those areas that are
inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency
sufficient to support and under normal circmstances does
or would support a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic
life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil
conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands gen-
erally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas
such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows,
mud flats, and natural ponds.
Sec. 8. This Order does not apply to projects presently
under construction, or to projects for which all of the
funds have been appropriated thtough Fiscal Year 1977,
or to projects and programs for which a draft t final
environmental impact statement will be filed prior to
October 1, 1977. The provisions of Section 2 of this Ordet
shall be implemented by each agency not later than
October 1, 1977.
Sec. 9. Nothing in this Order shall apply to assistance
provided for emergency work, essential to save lives and
protect property and public health and safety, performed
pursuant to Section 305 and 306 of the Disaster Relief
Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 148, 42 U.S.C. 5145 and 5146).
Sec. 10. To the extent the provisions of Sections 2 and
5 of this Order are applicable to projects covered by
Section 104(h) of the Housing and Community Develop-
ment Act of 1974, as amended (88 Stat. 640, 42 U.S.C.
5304(h)), the responsibilities under tiuxe provisions may
be assumed by the appropriae applicant, if the applicant
has also assumed, with respect to such projects, all of
the responsibilities for environmental review, decision-
making, and action pursuant to the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
Jimmy Carter
The White House,
May 24, 1977.
AS-2
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
APPENDIX B
SAMPLE DRAFT NEPA DOCUMENTATION
-------
APPENDIX B1
SAMPLE OUTLINE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(Excepted from Chapter 5-7 of NYSDEC Handbook of Procedures
for Implementing EPA Delegation Agreement)
-------
10/11/83
B-7
Attachment C
OUTLINE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
I. Project Identification
(Project Name:
Name cc Address of
Applicant:
EPA Project Number:
Project Location:
(Project name, project location, with general
description of what the project is for (eg.,
collectors, treatment plant, etc.))
(Name and address of applicant.)
(Step Grant Application.)
(City, Town, Village, etc.
County, State.)
n. Description of Facilities Planning Area (RRIEF)
(Ref: 1979 EPA (NEPA) Procedures Section 6.507(c))
a. existing environment (key areas of concern including environmentally sensitive
areas).
b. clear maps
c. existing and projected land use and population
d. description of existing wastewater collection and disposal systems.
e. relationship and conformance to 208 plan.
III. Purpose and Need for Project
(Ref: 1379 EPA(NEPA) Procedures Section 6.507(c))
include water quality/impaired usage problems
IV. Detailed Description of Selected Plan
a. Describe project covered under grant and remaining sewer service areas (use
clear maps); include system size (capacity); collection, transport and treatment
system components; length and diameter of sewers; and ultimate effluent and
sludge disposal method (use metric units first—English units in parenthesis for all
measurements, capacities, etc.)
b. Describe proposed wastewater management plan (20-year) for areas outside the
sewer service area.
*
V. Project Costs
a. total capital and OArM (present worth)
b. total annual
c. cost to individual families
d. 'f applicable, cost to abandon septic tanks system and connect to collection
system.
Bl-1
-------
VI. Evaluation of Alternatives (including the "No-Action" alternative)
(Ref: Section 6.507 (c))
a. Discuss the "No-Action" alternative, include a brief description of the future
environment without the project.
b. Only items relevant to the proposed action should be presented.
i. Discuss and compare major alternatives for the study area.
ii. Screen each alternative with respect to:
capital, operation, maintenance, and replacement costs
significant primary (direct) and secondary (indirect) environmental
effects
physical, legal, or institutional Constraints
compliance with regulatory requirements
jive special attention to long-term impacts, irreversible impacts, and
"induced" impacts such as development
give reason(s) for rejecting any alternative
state any significant environmental benefits precluded by the rejec-
tion of all alternatives
iii. In addition, alternatives discussed should address the following when
appropriate:
flow and waste reduction measures, including infiltration/inflow
reduction
appropriate water conservation measures
alternative locations, capacities, and construction phasing of facili-
ties
alternative waste management techniques, including treatment and
discharge, wastewater reuses, land application, and individual sys-
tems
alternative methods for management of sludge, other residual mate-
rials, including utilization options such as land application, com-
oosting, and conversion of sludge for marketing as a soil conditioner
or fertili/.s:-
improving effluent quality through more efficient operation and
maintenance
appropriate energy reduction measures
multiple use, including recreation an education.
VI1. Environmental Consequences of the Selected Plan (Ref: Section 6.507(c) 1 and 6)
\. Relevant primary and secondary impacts of the proposed action giving special
attention to unavoidable impacts, the relationship between local short-term uses
of man's environment and maintenance and enhancement of long-term produc-
ti vi ty.
surface and groundwater quality
water supply and use
noise levels
air quality (relative to State Implementation Plan)
population projections and their relationship to 208 plans
Bl-2
-------
environmentally sensitive areas (floodplains wetlands, prime agricultural
lands, aquifer recharge areas, coastal zones, etc.)
historic/archeological sites
other related federal/state project in the area
plant and animal communities affected, especially those containing en-
dangered or threatened plant/animal species.
B. Steps to Minimize Adverse Effects on the Environment
procedures to mitigate primary impact (i.e. dust control, mufflers, etc.)
special grant conditions
environmental consideration in plans and specifications
structural modifications (changes in facility sizing, location or design)
non-structural measures (staging facilities, developing and enforcing land
use provisions and regulations)
VIII. Coordination of environmental Review and Reference Documents Consulted
•\. Public Participation Program (Ref: Sec. 6.302(d))
B. Federal, State and Local Agencies Consulted on the project
1. Areas of significant input by other agencies (Specific reference must be
made to the 208 plan).
2. List of other agencies consulted
Include sources of information (documents) used to describe the existing environment and to
assess future environmental impacts. This will usually include 208 plans, EID, wastewater
facilities plan, SIP, additional information supplied by the applicant, etc.
BU3
-------
APPENDIX B2
FNSI/EA
-------
•«tt> ST
-------
This decision is based on a careful review of the facility plan and supporting
documents by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)
and the recommendations of the NYSDEC regional office. All of these documents,
along with the environmental assessment, are on file at the EPA and the NYSDEC
regional offices, where they are available for public scrutiny upon request. A
copy of the environmental assessment is enclosed for your review.
Environmental review and certification of plans and specifications for the
Step 3 construction phase of the project will be carried out by NYSDEC. An
oversight review will be carried out by EPA to ensure compliance with federal
regulations.
Conments supporting or disagreeing with this decision may be submitted to
the EPA for consideration. All comments must be received within thirty (30)
calendar days of the date of this finding of no significant impact (FNSI).
Please address your comments to the Chief, New York/Virgin Islands Section,
Environmental Impacts Branch, Room 400. After evaluating any conments
received on the project, EPA will make a final decision. However, no
administrative action will be taken on the project for at least thirty (30)
calendar days after the date of this FNSI.
Enclosure
Bfi.D.
imistrator
B 2 - 2
-------
Environmental Assessment
I. Project Identification:
Project Name:
City of Norwich Wastewater Treatment
and Transmission Facilities
Name and Address of
Applicant:
City of Norwich
City Hall
East Main Street
Norwich, New York 13815
EPA Project Number:
C-36-0648-03
Project Location:
City of Norwich, Chenango County
New York
11. Description of Facility Planning Area:
The facility planning area is located in Chenango County in the eastern
southern tier of New York State and consists of the City of Norwich, the
Villages of North Norwich and Oxford, and portions of the Towns of Norwich,
North Norwich, Oxford, Plymouth, and Preston (see Figures 1 and 2). The
planning area consists of a strip of land approximately 5 kilometers (3
miles) wide by 27 km (17 mi) long running in a north-south direction and
generally following the course of the Chenango River and New York State Route
12. The sewered portions of these areas are served by the City of Norwich
WTP (see Figure 2).
The Norwich area is typical of those in the Appalachian Plateau with wide,
flat, steep-sided valleys surrounded by well-rounded and gently rolling
hills. Elevations in the area range from 57 meters (186 feet) above sea
level in the valley to 293 m (960 ft) above sea level on the surrounding
hills. Most development in the planning area has occurred on the valley
floor adjacent to the Chenango River. Agriculture is the predominant land
use in the valley outside of the city and villages. Some industrial and
strip commercial development has also occurred along the NYS Route 12 corri-
dor. .The surrounding hills are predominently forested with some farmland
along the highways.
The Chenango River and Canasawacta Creek are the major water bodies in the
area, classifications of which are shown in Figure 3. Groundwater aquifers
located in the glacial overburden deposited on the valley floor are high
yield and provide good quality water with recharge from the adjacent river
and creek. Two public water supply systems operate within the planning area,
one serving the City of Norwich and the other the Village of Oxford. The
primary water supply source for Norwich is Chenango Lake which feeds two
reservoirs at Ransford Creek. There are also two wells located at the water
filtration plant site. Oxford depends on one well and two springs for its
water supply. Other communities in the planning area use individual house-
hold wells and springs.
B2-3
-------
-2-
The climate in the project area is characterized by moderately warm summers
and cool winters with temperatures ranging from a high of 38 degrees Celsius
(101 degrees Fahrenheit) to a low of -38 degrees C (-36 degrees F). The
approximate average daily maximum temperature is 13 degrees C (56 degrees F)
and the average daily minimum is 1 degree C (33 degrees F). Annual
precipita-tion, occurring as rain or snow, averages about 102 centimeters (40
inches) per year. The summer months are the wettest but precipitation is
generally well distributed throughout the year. Overcast days are common
with only 50 clear days expected per year. Fog 1s also common in the river
valley with 50 days per year expected. The prevailing wind is from the west
but shifts to the south during a three-month period each year.
The planning area has a history of flooding problems along the Chenango River
and Canasawacta Creek, not only from storm runoff but also frequently from
ice jams at the mouth of the creek and at some bridges on the river. Because
of past flooding problems and a continued threat of flooding, all communities
in the project area are eligible for and participating in the emergency phase
of the National Flood Insurance Program. Using flood insurance study maps, a
map of the project area showing the 100-year floodplain along the major
streams and river was compiled (see Figure 4). Figure 4 also provides the
location of wetlands in or near the project area. In addition to the
environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) mentioned above, much of the land
within the project area, particularly in the river valley, is considered to
be prime farmland; that is, land which has the soil quality, growing season,
and moisture supply to economically produce sustained high crop yields, when
treated and managed using accepted farming methods.
Population in the planning area is expected to show steady growth over the
planning period and at a rate substantially higher than statewide and
regional averages. Table 1 shows population projections for the political
subdivisions of the planning area affected by the proposed project.
Population projections for the Towns of Preston and Plymouth are not included
since no project is proposed for these areas. The Town and Village of
Oxford, likewise, are not included since it has been determined as a result
of facility planning that this area will be a separate, later phase of the
project. Population projections are in general agreement with the New York
State Water Quality Management Plan (the "208" plan). Populations in the
table are not disaggregated by actual and potential service areas although
this was considered in projecting wastewater flows.
TABLE 1 - POPULATION PROJECTIONS
1985
City of Norwich 8,800
Town of Norwich 3,500
Town of North Norwich 1,800
1990
1995
2000
2005
9,300
9,800
10,200
10,600
3,700
3,800
4,000
4,200
1,800
1,900
2,000
2,100
The existing wastewater treatment system for the City of Norwich is a 7,570
cubic meter per day (2.0 million gallons per day) intermediate WTP which
discharges to the Chenango River (at a point north of the confluence with
B2-4
-------
-3-
Canasawacta Creek) under New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (SPDES) Permit No. NY-0021423. The effluent from the WTP is not
meeting the discharge requirements of the SPDES permit. Sludge from the WTP
is disposed of at the Chenango County Refuse District No. 3 Landfill in North
Norwich.
The City of Norwich wastewater collection system consists of approximately 39
km (24 mi) of separate sanitary sewers that range in size from 15 cm (6 in)
to 76 cm (30 in) in diameter, some of which are 95 years old. Portions of
the collection system have an underdrain system which is connected into the
manholes. The underdrain system was apparently built at the time the sewers
were constructed in an attempt to drain the area. Because of the porous
nature of the gravel soils in the city, as river levels rise, considerable
infiltration is introduced into the sewer system through the underdrain
system. Because of the presence of the underdrain system and its effect on
the flows in the sanitary sewer system, the collection system has been
defined as a combined sewer system. Wastewater in the surrounding towns and
the Village of Oxford is disposed of by individual septic tank systems.
III. Purpose and Need for the Project:
The purpose and need for the project is to improve the water quality in the
Chenango River by improving the quality of wastewater effluent discharged,
thereby allowing Norwich to meet the discharge requirements of its SPDES per-
mit. The existing WTP is only an intermediate treatment facility and the
Clean Water Act mandates secondary treatment as a minimum. The Chenango
River in the area of the Norwich discharge is a water quality limited river
(meaning that the effluent discharge requirements must be tailored to what
the river can accept at low flow without contravening water quality stan-
dards) which will require treatment levels higher than secondary limits. The
City of Norwich could be subjected to enforcement action by federal and state
agencies if it fails to improve its wastewater discharge. The proposed WTP
will allow Norwich to fulfill its permit obligations.
A new 76 cm (30 in) trunk sewer will be required to transport wastewater from
the existing WTP site on Hale Street to the new WTP site south of the city.
The capacity of the new WTP will be sufficient to accept future wastewater
flows from areas of the Towns of North Norwich and Norwich (see Figure 5)
which have a history of failing septic systems and which could potentially
contaminate groundwater.
IV. Detailed Description of the Selected Plan:
The proposed project will replace the existing City of Norwich WTP with a new
WTP at a new site (see Figure 6 and 7) approximately 1.4 km (4,500 ft) south
of the city. The proposed WTP will use the rotating biological contactor
(RBC) process to treat the wastewater to advanced secondary treatment levels.
Capacity of the WTP will be 8,330 cu m/d (2.2 mgd) on an average daily flow
basis. The WTP will be designed to treat a peak dry weather flow of 15,900
cu m/d (4.2 mgd) at advanced secondary treatment levels. Flows above this
amount up to 45,420 cu m/d (12 mgd), which occur 2 to 3 weeks per year during
B2-5
-------
-4-
wet weather, will receive only primary treatment and chlorination prior to
discharge through a new 76 cm (30 in) outfall to the Chenango River.
Chlorination of the effluent is required to protect the Class "B" waters of
the Chenango River south of the discharge. Dechlorination of the effluent is
not required since the in-stream dilution and control of the concentration of
chlorine in the effluent are sufficient to protect the fishery.
A new 76 cm (30 in) diameter trunk sewer will be constructed to convey flows
from the existing WTP on Hale Street to the new WTP on a route paralleling an
existing railroad bed. The trunk sewer will require a stream crossing on
Canasawacta Creek.
The new WTP will be constructed on a 1.8 hectare (4.5 acre) site that is
located in the 100-year floodplain of the Chenango River, but which is out-
side of the proposed regulatory floodway (the minimum channel required to
convey 100-year flood flows with no more than a one-foot rise in flood
elevation). The site will require 38,000 cubic meters (50,000 cubic yards)
of fill (or approximately 5,000 truckloads) to raise the site to approxima-
tely 1.1 m (3.5 ft) above the 100-year flood level.
The existing treatment plant will be locked and left as is for the present
after the new plant comes into use.
The RBC treatment process uses media (on which wastewater-treating bacteria
grows) arranged in discs on a shaft that rotates through the wastewater.
Treatment plant units will consist of a low lift influent pump, screening,
grit removal, primary settling, RBCs, secondary settling, and chlorination.
Sludge handling units will consist of gravity thickening, anaerobic
digestion, and covered sand drying beds. Sludge will be disposed of at the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)-approved
Chenango County Refuse District No. 3 Landfill in North Norwich by incor-
poration with soil cover. Since the existing landfill is expected to be
closed, the City of Norwich has a commitment from Chenango County to accept
sludge at any new landfill for the 20-year life of the project.
Additionally, the city is investigating future land application of sludge if
suitable cost-effective sites can be found that meet NYSDEC Part 360 guideli-
nes. The cost-effectiveness of landfilling of sludge may change because of
increased trucking costs depending upon the location of a new Chenango County
Landfi11.
V. Project Costs:
The eligible cost of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately
$9,528,000 of which 75 percent, or approximately $7,146,000 is the EPA grant.
This grant will include $289,000 as an advance allowance to help the granter
defray early design costs. This advance will be deducted from the fiscal
grant. The total annual cost of the project is estimated to be $329,000
which includes an annual operation and maintenance (0 & M) cost of $208,000.
The project will result in an average increase of $132 per user per year over
the existing user charge of $30, for a total average user charge of $162 per
year.
B2-6
-------
-5-
VI. Evaluation of Alternatives:
a. No Action Alternative
The no-action alternative was considered but rejected since it would allow
the continued discharge of inadequately treated wastewater from the Norwich
WTP, resulting in impaired water quality in the Chenango River. The City of
Norwich would face enforcement action by state and federal agencies for
failing to meet the minimum required level of treatment.
b. Treatment Process and Site Alternatives
Approximately forty treatment alternatives for the Norwich area were screened
for ability to meet effluent standards, cost-effectiveness, implementabi1ity,
and environmental impacts. Many of the alternatives, such as
physical/chemical treatment, were rejected due to high capital and opera-
tional costs. Land treatment systems, which include spray irrigation,
overland flow, and infiltration/percolation, were rejected since spray irri-
gation and overland flow would require storage of wastewater for up to six
months during the winter. The only sites large enough to accommodate such
storage are located in the floodplain and would encroach on the floodway.
Likewise, infiltration/percolation was rejected since it would require a
large site located in the floodplain or excessive pumping to an upland area.
Of all the alternatives considered, only aerated lagoons, RBC's, and an
extended aeration system were considered to be feasible.
Aerated lagoons would require a land area of approximately 12 ha (30 ac). Of
five WTP sites considered (see Figure 8), only Site No. 2, also known as the
Jamba Farms site, a 71 ha (175 ac) parcel already owned by the City of
Norwich, located in the floodplain south of the existing WTP, was large
enough for a lagoon. Impacts associated with a lagoon at this site included
loss of active prime farmland and floodplain, possible encroachment on the
floodway, disturbance of an extensive and sensitive archaeological site, and
potential contamination of nearby wells. Also, considerable amounts of fill
would have to be trucked in from offsite. Because of the floodplain loca-
tion, the lagoon could be subject to excessive erosion, which in addition to
posing a threat of destruction of the lagoon itself, could cause considerable
sedimentation down river. This potential sedimentation was considered signi-
ficant in the adverse impact that it could have on the warnwater fishery in
the Chenango River, a fishery ranked ninth in the state in fishing use inten-
sity, and which brings approximately $2 million annually to the area. It was
due to the potential for sedimentation that a proposed bypass channel (which
would mitigate location of the lagoon in the floodplain and provide fill for
the lagoon) also was rejected. Additionally, there was no assurance that a
lagoon could consistently provide the necessary level of treatment, specifi-
cally nitrification. Although a lagoon was potentially the least costly of
the alternatives considered, it was rejected because of excessive adverse
environmental impacts and inability to consistently meet treatment levels.
B2-7
-------
-6-
The extended aeration treatment process was estimated to have a project cost
of $12,100,000 in present worth.1 This treatment process could be
constructed on Site No. 1, the 1.8 ha (4.4ac) site of the existing WTP on
Hale Street. However, the existing WTP site would not be physically large
enough for either the lagoon or RBC process, particularly since the proposed
future relocation of Hale Street will reduce the size of this site. A por-
tion of this site is also in the 100-year floodplain. A benefit'of this site
is that it would not require the construction of a new trunk sewer with the
potential of induced development in the floodplain along the length of the
sewer. A disadvantage of this site is the density of development around the
site which could cause complaints of nuisance odors from the WTP. Use of any
other site with the extended aeration process would have been more costly.
The RBC treatment process at Site 2 was estimated to have a project cost of
$11,900,000 in present worth. Of the 10 alternatives considered which would
meet SPDES permit effluent standards, this treatment process was the most
cost-effective and environmentally sound. Of the five sites considered
during the planning process, Site 1 is limited in size and is partially
located in floodplain; Site 2 is located entirely in floodplain; Sites 2, 3,
4, and 5 are on active prime farmland; Sites 4 and 5 are in active agri-
cultural districts; Sites 3 and 4 would require a pumping station and force
main and a river crossing to reach the sites; Sites 2 and 5 would require a
stream crossing and a long trunk sewer; Site 2 is an important archaeological
site; and all sites are potentially sensitive for archaeological remains.
Site No. 4 is no longer available since a nearby mobile home park has been
expanded onto the site. The RBC process on the Site No. 2 south of the
existing Hale Street site was chosen because it was the most cost-effective
on a site with essentially similar environmental impacts overall. An advan-
tage of Site No. 2 is that it lends itself well to multiple use concepts
such as jogging trails, fishing access, archeological preservation, and
public restroom facilities for recreational and community garden functions
around the WTP.
VII. Environmental Consequences of the Selected Plan:
a. Relevant Primary and Secondary Impacts
Primary environmental impacts are direct and short-term in nature, generally
the result of construction activities, and include such things as erosion,
stream siltation and turbidity, noise, air pollution, removal of vegetation,
groundwater drawdown, and impacts on cultural resources. These may be miti-
gated or avoided by survey, data recovery, and analysis prior to construc-
tion, and by enforcement of the appropriate conditions in the construction
specifications during the actual work period.
^Present worth cost is the amount of money, which, if invested today at a given
interest rate, would produce exactly the amount of money needed to pay for all
costs (factoring in applicable salvage value) throughout the life of the pro-
ject. It also provides a means of comparing dissimilar alternatives on an
equal basis.
B2-8
-------
-7-
Secondary impacts are indirect and long-term in nature. They include
develop-ment and population growth induced by sewerage facilities. They also
include the effects of development on cultural or natural resources, air and
water quality, destruction of habitat, environmentally sensitive areas, and
upon wildlife itself.
The environmental impacts of the proposed action were evaluated on the basis
of the effect on water quality, water supply, noise levels, air quality,
population, environmentally sensitive areas, cultural resources, plant and
animal communities, traffic, and safety.
Mater Quality
It is not expected that the proposed project will seriously impair surface or
groundwater quality. There may be temporary increases in sediment runoff and
suspended solids loadings in the Chenango River and Canasawacta Creek during
construction from erosion, stream crossing, and dewatering operations. A
beneficial impact will be an improvement in the water quality in the Chenango
River due to the ability of the new Norwich WTP to meet the discharge
requirements of its SPDES permit.
Mater Supply
There is no anticipated impact to the City of Norwich's water supply as a
result of the project. Likewise, no impact is expected to any water wells in
the town in the vicinity of the proposed project.
Noise Levels
Construction noises could result in unacceptable noise levels for those
living in proximity to construction sites. Noise levels will vary with the
type of machinery used during construction. The expected levels will be
between 78 to 85 dBA (A weighted decibels) for vibrators to backhoes
respectively. These sound pressure levels (SPL) in decibels (dBA) are
measured at 15.2 m (50 ft) from the machine. In general, noise will be
limited to the particular construction site(s) and for relatively short
periods of time. Construction activities will be confined to daylight
hours, wherever possible.
Ai r Quality
Air quality may be affected by exhaust emissions and dust resulting from
construction. Spillage of excavated material on roads and unstabilized tem-
porary gravel road surfaces may produce dust from traffic or windy conditions.
The City of Norwich, Chenango County, New York is located within the Southern
Tier East Air Quality Control Region (AQCR). Data from monitoring stations
indicate that the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are being
met. New York has prepared a State Implementation Plan (SIP) which provides
for the continued attainment of the NAAQS. An analysis has shown that the
proposed project will not, by itself, result in a contravention of the NAAQS,
and is in conformance with the SIP.
B2-9
-------
-8-
Popu1 ation Projections and Their Relationship to the 208 Plan
The population figures used in this project are in general conformance to the
208 Plan projections. The proposed project should not affect the rate or
amount or future growth in the project area.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
The environmentally sensitive areas (ESA's) which may be affected by the pro-
posed project include floodplain, wetlands, prime farmland, and the warmwater
fishery in the Chenango River and Canasawacta Creek. Most of the wetlands
and prime farmland in the project area also are within the area designated as
100-year floodplain.
The filling of the floodplain at the WTP will remove 8.2 ha (4.5 ac) of water
storage from the floodplain but will not encroach upon the regulatory flood-
way. The trunk sewer will also be located in the floodplain but outside the
floodway. Although the fill may have an effect upon flood levels, an analy-
sis has shown that any rise in 100-year flood elevations is within the 0.3 m
(1.0 ft) allowed for areas which have not completed formal floodway studies.
There is a potential impact to the warm water fishery spawning areas
downstream of the WTP from increased turbidity and sediment loading during
construction of this project if flooding occurs before the fill stabilizes
and erosion control measures are in place. Bank erosion along Canasawacta
Creek resulting from the trunk sewer pipeline crossing is also a possibility
until the area restabi1izes.
There are no construction-related impacts to any wetlands in the area since
none are located along the project route or site. An existing farm access
road to the WTP site which passes through a small wetland located behind a
shopping center on Route 12 will not be used during construction. A small
area shown as wetland on the wetland map, south of the WTP site, is actually
in agricultural use.
The filling of the WTP site will also remove the area from active prime
farmland. However, the loss of this farmland will not affect the economic
viability of the remainder of the parcel. No active agricultural districts
are affected by the proposed project.
Since capacity is being provided in the new Norwich WTP for future growth in
the City of Norwich and the Towns of Norwich and North Norwich, and since
much of the presently undeveloped land is either wetland, floodplain, or
prime farmland, it is possible that some of the future growth could occur in
these ESAs. However, there is sufficient undeveloped land outside these
ESAs to accommodate the projected population growth. It is unlikely that
capacity in the sewer system will, of itself, cause future development since
sewer service will probably not be extended to outlying towns until after
development has reached a density that makes the extension cost-effective.
B2-10
-------
-9-
Cultural Resources
In conformance with the procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, a cultural resources investigation has been conducted at the
site of the proposed sewage treatment plant. The cultural resources survey
has identified an archaeological site which has been determined eligible for
the National Register of Historic Places. The EPA, in consultation with the
New York State Historic Preservation Office (NYSHPO), believes that the
impacts on the archaeological site from the proposed construction can be
mitigated through the implementation of a data retrieval plan. The USEPA
will require that the Step 3 grant contain appropriate mitigating measures to
protect the cultural resources. In no event shall the grantee be allowed to
advertise for construction bids prior to satisfactorily completing the
cultural resources management process, and prior to receiving written
authorization. You will be notified by public announcement as to the resolu-
tion of the cultural resources management questions.
Plant and Animal Communities Affected
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NYSDEC Division of
Fish and Wildlife did not reveal the presence of any Federal or State
endangered species within the project area.
The anticipated impacts to plants or animals as a result of this project
would result from temporary increases in sediment loads on the creek or river
during stream crossing. This could adversely effect aquatic life or cause
increases in the growth of algae. Additionally, the need for substantial
amounts of fill could require the opening of a new mine in the Norwich area
with possible subsequent loss of wildlife habitat.
Traffic and Safety
Since approximately 5,000 truckloads of fill will be required for the WTP
site in addition to normal construction traffic, there could be noticeable
increases in traffic along Route 12 and along the route to the mine area
(either existing borrow pits or possibly a new mine) at times during
construction. Open trenches and unattended construction equipment could also
present potentially unsafe conditions during non-working hours.
b. Steps to Minimize Adverse Affects to the Environment
Plans, specifications, and contract documents will contain specific items to
control noise, dust, erosion, sedimentation, and impacts to streams,
wetlands, and floodplains. NYSDEC Region 7 office will coordinate controls
and review the aforementioned documents for environmental compatibility
before allowing the applicant to start construction. The Regional Office
will also conduct on-site pre-contract meetings, inspections, and follow-up
to assure compliance.
A NYSDEC stream disturbance permit will be required for the stream crossing
at Canasawacta Creek of the trunk sewer and for the outfall into the Chenango
River. The contractor will be required to provide erosion control to prevent
sediment runoff into the stream. If dewatering of excavation is necessary,
the contractor will be required to filter out sediment, if any is present,
B2-11
-------
-10-
through the use of fabric filters, hay bales, sedimentation basins, or simi-
lar measures. Gabions and riprap will be utilized around outfall pipes to
decrease erosion and sedimentation. Access points for construction equipment
along the river bank will likewise be protected to prevent erosion and sedi-
mentation. Construction of the project along the :iver bank area will not
commence until after July 15 of each year to protect spawning areas, and no
work will be allowed during exceptionally wet weather conditions'that could
lead to excessive erosion by construction equipment. The contractor will be
limited in the length of trench that can be opened at one time and will be
required to mulch and reseed any exposed soil as soon as practical. Any
excavated material which is not returned to the trench or any spoils
material, will be properly disposed of by the contractor at a NYSDEC approved
site so that it does not affect any wetland, floodplain, or waterway. Also,
any stockpiled fill will be properly protected to control sediment.
In the design of the new WTP, its structures will be located and oriented so
as to minimize the amount of fill required and the impact on future flood
elevations. To minimize any potential erosion at the WTP site during and
after construction, the contractor will be required to schedule major site
fill and earth work to avoid flood periods. Riprap, protective fabric,
mulching, and seeding of exposed areas, and selected plantings for soil sta-
bilization will also be used as appropriate on all areas exposed to flood
flows.
A data retrieval plan for the archaeological site is under development which
will be submitted for approval to the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation. In no event will any construction take place at the sewage
treatment plant site prior to completion of the mitigation procedures at the
Jamba archaeological site.
If temporary bypassing of untreated sewage is necessary, the contractor
will be required to pump to the next downstream manhole. At no time will the
temporary bypass of untreated sewage to the stream be allowed. At no time
will a discharge of untreated sewage be allowed on the ground surface.
Water supply lines adjacent to the construction will be identified in the
plans and specification so as not to be disrupted during excavations. If
accidental disruption occurs, the contractor shall be responsible for
supplying potable water.
The contractor will be required to control noise through the use of proper
mufflers. Construction activities will not be allowed during holidays,
weekends, or outside normal working hours, except in an emergency. The
contractor shall minimize any noise caused by his activities and shall
observe any local ordinances on noise control.
The contractor will control dust through the use of sweeping and sprinkling
with water in paved areas and through sprinkling and mulching in unpaved
areas. The use of calcium chloride or petroleum products for dust control
will be prohibited. The contractor will also be required to control exhaust
emissions on equipment through proper maintenance.
B2-12
-------
-11-
The contractor will be required to replace any ornamental shrubs or trees
damaged or removed by contraction with the same or similar species of
appropriate size. Any lawns or fields which are disturbed will be regraded
and restored.
Although traffic may be disrupted or congested at certain sites, and streets
closed for short periods^ the contractor will be required to maintain the
flow of traffic wherever yussible, and access at all times to emergency
vehicles. The contractor will be required to use flagmen, traffic signals,
and lighted barricades where necessary for traffic control. Any unattended
open excavation or unsafe condition will be protected by means of flashing
lights, temporary fencing or barricades, or heavy metal plate covers.
Equipment and hazardous material will be secured during non-working hours.
Watertight covers will be required for
New manholes, the trunk sewer, and the
any potential impact on the floodplain
Special Grant Condition
manholes located in the floodplain.
WTP site will be designed to minimize
or future flood conditions.
The grant for this project will be conditional upon prohibition of hookups to
the sewerage system from new development in wetlands and floodplains. This
condition is made to protect these areas from the negative impact of develop-
ment in these environmentally sensitive areas. The grantee may apply for a
waiver exempting the community from the sewer hookup restrictions and block
and lot mapping if they can demonstrate that the project will have no adverse
impact on wetlands or floodplains.
The following grant conditions will apply:
a. The City of Norwich has submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) as part of an approvable facilities plan, block
and lot mapping which clearly delineates all specific vacant or poten-
tially developable parcels of land within the facilities planning area
that are partially or wholly within the 100-year floodplain as defined
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or within wetlands as
defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The applicant has been
required to use the most accurate available data to prepare these maps.
They must also show which parcels had been developed prior to date of
issuance of finding of no significant impact/environmental assessment
(FNSI/EA).
b. The grantee agrees that for a period of 50 years from the date of the
FNSI/EA no sewer hookup or other connections to the wastewater treatment
facilities included in the facililty plan scope of this grant will be
allowed or permitted so as to allow the discharge of wastewater from any
building, facility, or other construction on any parcel of land par-
tially or wholly within any wetland, or the 100-year floodplain, which
land parcel, as of the date of the FNSI/EA, was undeveloped (i.e. upon
which no building, facility of other construction has been erected or
placed) or had the potential for additional development, unless approved
in writing by the EPA Regional Administrator. This restriction shall
not apply (except where encroaching on wetlands) to waterfront
recreational facilities which, by their nature, must be on waterfront
locations.
B2-13
-------
-12-
c. This condition is intended to benefit any persons or private organiza-
tion or governmental entity which may have an interest in the avoidance
of any future growth in the designated areas. Any such beneficiary (who
may otherwise have standing to seek enforcement and the right to begin
such action in a court of competent jurisdiction) may seek to enforce
compliance with this condition in the courts of the State of New York
against the grantees or any non-federal person, organization, or entity
subject to this condition if notice of intent to seek such enforcement
is first given to the EPA Regional Administrator, New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation, the grantee and affected
governmental entities and if none of those so notices initiates correc-
tive action within 90 days of such notice.
d. If the mapping required under (a.) delineate any parcels which will be
affected by this special condition, the grantee shall have included a
full discussion of the condition and its effects as part of the public
hearing on the Environmental Information Document.
VIII. Coordination of Environmental Review and Reference Documents Consulted:
a. Public Participation Program
Public hearings on the proposed project were held at 7:30 p.m., May 1, 1979;
at 7:30 p.m., January 31, 1983; and at 7:30 p.m., December 28, 1983 at the
Norwich City Hall at which times, project impacts, costs, and alternatives
were presented and explained. There are no objections to this project on
file with EPA at this time.
b. Federal, State, and Local Agencies Consulted
1. Areas of Significant Input by Other Agencies
The applicant and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
have provided assurance that the requirements of the New York State
Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) have been satisfied. Specific infor-
mation is on file in the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) Region 7 office and in the office of the applicant.
This document is the statement of findings on the facility plan, its addenda,
supporting correspondence, and environmental public hearing which consti-
tutes the draft and final SEQR environmental impact statement.
List of Other Agencies Consulted:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cortland, New York
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, New York, New York
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District Office, Baltimore,
Maryland
New York State Historic Preservation Office, Albany, New York
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, Albany, New York
B2-14
-------
-13-
--Sources of Information:
City of Norwich Wastewater Facility Plan and Environmental
Information Document, January 1979; Addendum 1, December 1982;
Addendum 2, December 1983; Addendum 3, February 1984, Addendum 4,
March, 1984 and NYSDEC correspondence file, O'Brien & Gere
Engineers, Inc., Syracuse, New York
City of Norwich Sewer System Evaluation Study, Phase I, June 1975;
Phase II, January 1979, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., Syracuse,
New York
City of Norwich Stage IA Archaeological Survey, February 1983;
Stage IB, December 1982; Phase II, May 1978, Public Archaeology
Facility, Binghamton, New York
New York State Water Quality Management (208) Plan, Appendix A,
January 1981
B2-15
-------
New York State
CLWTON
FRANKLIN
ST. LAWRENCE
JEFFERSON
ESSEX
CO
ro
i
LEWIS
HAMILTON
WARREN
OSWEGO
ONONDAGA 1
ONEIOA
| MADISON
QC
UJ
J
2
oc
UJ
X
T
O
K
0
*
1
VI
PULTON I SARATOGA I J
IMONTGOMERY'
Cc*1
*°r~ / \ vT / /
-------
FIGURE 2
NORWICH STUDY AREA LOCATION MAP
B2-17
File 448 005.IOF
S O'BRIENfi GERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
Class Best Usage
AA Source of water
supply for drinking,
cu1i nary or food
processing purposes,
and any other
usages; disinfection
requi red.
A Source of water
supply for drinking,
culinary or food
processing purposes,
and any other
usages; coagulation,
sedimentation,
filtration and
di sinfection
requi red.
B Primary contact
recreation and other
uses except as water
supply source.
C Fishing and other
uses except as water
supply source and
primary contact
recreation.
D Secondary contact
recreation; may not
be able to support
the propagation of
fish.
3 KILOMETERS
effluent
LIMITING
WATER QUALITY
LIMITING
FIGURE 3
N.Y.S. STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS
File-448005 IIF
O'BRIEN & GERE
B2-18 150 ENGINEERS.INC
-------
m7
1 ¦¦ \
SrV V
\ . - ' - I '¦ ¦¦^ • ) \
^m:L \, \
•' '•©' 3 •'¦:'• 5 ''' ' '' ' ^
• 0 - _i" ' .• ;»•
¦\ ~.-.i v' I ,'i
N
CITY OF
NORWICH, N.Y.
C-36-648
¦"^^Vv .0|/» W- V- • •• "'• "
. r- ¦%¦
; r , . "/«# / „\'./yii.::-:.:'
PLANNING AREA
FLOODPLAIN &
WETLANDS
4/3/84
FIGURE 4
LEGEND
FLOODPLAIN
~ PROPOSED RBC SITE
• WETLAND
SCALE: l"= 2000'
V, z : r.fonr.*? ti on
de^ictzG or. mis map
wcS cor.p'ilcd from
vcrijus sources and
1? belli', cc to be
c awc "r .
B2-19
-------
CITY OF
NORWICH, N.Y.
C-36-648
PLANNING AREA
FLOODPLAIN &
POTENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT AREAS
4/26/84
LEGEND
FLOODPLAIN
SJ-TUUi: POTENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT AREAS
i mile:
i kilometer
FIGURE 5
-------
FiGUfcC *0 I
C-M-MI
Uh(KAk
l*/9/tS
ICV1SCD }/l4/»4
FIGURE 6
-------
rtcufte mo t
— ¦ mamMTtw nam
BjUOCf FLOW
Layout of proposed RBC
wastewater treatment plant
ClTr Of
¦UTEWTCa T«C«T«tNT njUTT
SITE riM
oonicNCGcne
Figure 7
-------
LEGEND
POTENTIAL
SITES
Figure 8
POTENTIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT
FACILITIES SITES
B2-23
File 443 QQ5 32 F
Gobrien&gere
ENGINEERS INC
-------
APPENDIX B3
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION I I
26 FEDERAL PLAZA
NEW YORK. NEW YORK 1O270
SEP 2 2 1987
To All Interested Parties:
This letter is in regard to a request by the Sussex County Municipal Utilities
Authority (SCMUA) for a categorical exclusion from substantive environmental
review requirements for the proposed modifications to the SCMUA's sludge com-
posting facility (Project Number 03^0406-07).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves this request, based on
the recommendations of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
and our review of the supporting data accompanying this request (summary
enclosed). It is the applicant's responsibility to make this approval and the
supporting documentation available at local repositories. In addition, the
SCMUA is required to advertise the decision in the local press, and indicate
the availability of the supporting documentation for public review.
Please be reminded that the EPA may revoke this exclusion if any of the
following conditions occur:
0 changes in the proposed action render it ineligible for exclusion;
0 new evidence indicates that serious local or environmental issues exist;
° federal, state, or local laws would be violated.
Should you have any questions concerning this decision, please address them
to the Chief, Environmental Assessment Section, Envirormental Impacts Branch,
Room 500.
Sincerely
Enclosure
B3-1
-------
SUSSEX COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY
COMPOSTING FACILITY MODIFICATIONS
SUSSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
USEPA PROJECT NO. C340406-07
I. Proposed Action;
The Sussex County Municipal Utilities Authority received a grant
in 1980 to construct a sludge composting facility to treat sludge
generated at the wastewater treatment plants in the county.
Construction for this project began in October of 1982 and the
facility initiated operations in June of 1984. Since that time
the plant has experienced odor problems, which has caused
affected residents to lodge complaints.
In order to alleviate these problems the Authority has proposed
to do the following:
- install a gas adsorption scrubber
- construct an enclosure over the existing detention pond
- acquire a rotary screener for wood chip
recovery and a mobile sweeper for general
clean-up for the existing compost site.
II. Alternatives Considered:
The alternative to the proposed action would be the no action
alternative. The no action alternative was rejected because,
under this alternative, the odor control problem would not be
alleviated.
The proposed action is necessary in order to reduce odors
associated with the treatment and the composting of sludge and
septage at the Sussex County wastewater management facility.
Minimal impacts are anticipated from the proposed construction at
this site, which was previously disturbed during construction of
existing facilities. Proper erosion and sedimentation controls
will minimize any adverse primary impacts associated with the
project. No adverse impacts to water quality, natural areas,
wetlands, floodplains, endangered species habitats or cultural
resources are expected to result from this project.
III. Eligibility for Granting Categorical Exclusion:
A. The proposed action conforms to the category of actions eligible
for exclusion since only ancillary equipment is being constructed
adjacent to existing facilities which will not affect the degree
of treatment or capacity of the existing treatment facilities.
B3-2
-------
Information available regarding the proposed action leads to the
conclusion that none of the criteria for not granting categorical
exclusions is present; (1) the action does not involve a new
discharge of surface or groundwaters; (2) there will be no
increase in the volume of discharge or loading of pollutants; (3)
there will be no provision of service to any new population; (4)
there will be no significant adverse effect on the quality of the
human environment; (5) there will be no significant adverse
effect on cultural resources, endangered or threatened species,
environmentally sensitive areas, or other environmentally
important natural resources; and (6) the action is cost-effective
and is not controversial.
Conclusion:
It is recommended that the proposed action be granted a
categorical exclusion from EPA procedures implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act; thereby eliminating the need
for additional review requirements and the issuance of a finding
of no significant impact/environmental assessment.
B3-3
-------
F'&UR.E. £
LOCALITY MAP
-------
Sussex Gjunfrj /UUA-
CoTnpcstiJy FaaZt ty fltodjfic&fctih
-------
APPENDIX B4
5-YEAR (DEVALUATION
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION I I
26 FEDERAL PLAZA
NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10278
SEP 1 £ 1S87
To All Interested Government Agencies and Public Groups:
Ponce Region, Puerto Rico
Vlllalba-Juana Diaz Trunk Sewer
C-72-093-03
On August 8, 1977, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Issued a
finding of no significant impact and environmental assessment (FNSI/EA) for the
above referenced project. Recently, the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality
Board (PREQB), in accordance with the delegation agreement for management of
the municipal wastewater treatment construction grants program, indicated its
intent to certify a grant application for construction of this project. In
accordance with 40 CPR Part 6, EPA's regulations for implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), this project has been re-evaluated to determine
whether the project or associated environmental conditions have changed signifi-
cantly since the FNSI/EA was issued.
In this regard, a cultural resource survey was recently conducted in conform-
ance with the requirements of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, to
determine whether the project would impact areas containing any significant
cultural resources. These surveys suggest that an area potentially affected by
the proposed Villalba-Juana Diaz Trunk Sewer project contains cultural resources
which may be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.
Consequently, any grant awarded for this project by EPA will be subject to a
special grant condition requiring completion of any additional cultural resource
investigations which may be required, and prohibiting const ruction activities
in the affected area until the cultural resource management process has been
satisfactorily completed.
This notice is to inform you that no significant changes have been made to this
project, and no significant adverse environmental impacts will result frem con-
struction and operation of this project. Accordingly, we have determined that
this project complies with the EPA regulations for Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act.
Any questions concerning this notice should be addressed to the Chief, Environ-
mental Analysis Section, Environmental Impacts Branch, Rocm 500.
Sincerely
Enclosure
B4-1
-------
Enclosure
Proposed Agency Action:
Project Name:
Project Number:
Purpose of Project:
Project Originator:
Project Location:
Project Description:
Proposed Eligible Project Cost:
EPA Grant:
Award of federal grant assistance for
construction of the Villalba-Juana Diaz
Trunk Sewer
Villalba-Juana Diaz Tnonk Sewer
C-72-093-03
To eliminate an overloaded and malfunc-
tioning single-stage trickling filter
treatment plant in Villalba, and convey
wastewaters, which are presently dis-
posed by means of septic tanks and
latrines, from the Guayabal Caranunity.
These wastewaters will ultimately be
conveyed to the Ponce Regional Waste-
water Treatment Facilities for treatment
and disposal.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority
Ponce Region, Puerto Rico
The existing Villalba Sewerage System
consists of a sanitary collection sewer
flowing to an overloaded single-stage
trickling filter treatment plant, which
will be eliminated by the proposed pro-
ject.
The proposed project includes construc-
tion of approximately 20,000 linear
feet of trunk sewer along road PR-149
between Villalba and Juana Diaz where
it will connect to the proposed Ponce-
Juana Diaz Trunk Sewer (Pig. 2). It
will consist of eight to twenty-four
inch diameter gravity lines, twelve
and fourteen inch diameter force mains,
with pumping stations at Jagueyes and
Guayabal Communities.
$4,373,415
$2,405,378
B4-2
-------
A r L A N T / C
OCEAN
11 v« fM
I
0
< ..... i £
Vn
/:
\
I1"""
i X
y->V- -—^ Cl.Ui
- I u'"* 3 v vs
/ "*«¦ , 4 I OftMfll I ,
' —-V» I * / 1
tf VJ ««!••<¦ • > /
r 7T~"
k,,,\ TlIN
pA 9
)
i
\A-
/ 2
I
\ "> /Tfc«'Qti« \ s-w »
V«|« I ^ / j*' * | «f v
*"* J JsAN >^V
,-c-vr>« «N I i > r \ r \
i \ I I N ' i- -.N in > 1 i(..«.•»• /
V-' j I i 1 ,t>«i"'«iJU i 4 i /
I.I ( lr/1
13 'V V V--I5-
W ,.1. yn^t*"]' ¦»,- /,. ;-.s *x
- «<.. v '•« t/'T'e
V ^ \ I Umai». j *¦' /
. „ VilWalia I \ l' 1 '»"M« /
14 s a *•»•» . J -Xj
/
vv f
Pctrfl* »
v—¦
sr.
A R / B B E A N
SEA
COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO
F10._J_MAP 3H0WIN0 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT SUB- BASINS
B4-3
-------
- ¦>. B4-zrr-
,Cr:/^- %$. ^ I
-------
APPENDIX B5
SAMPLE EA LANGUAGE ON NAAQS
ATTAINMENT STATUS
-------
APPENDIX B5
Paragraphs on NAAQS Attainment Status for Inclusion in EAs
1. Attainment in a Designated Air Quality Maintenance Area - com-
plies with all NAAOS. Where this is true, the following state-
ment may be included in the EA:
The County of and City of are
located within the Air Quality Control Region.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for this City are
in compliance. An analysis has shown that the proposed (modifi-
cations, construction, etc.) will not by itself result in contra-
vention of NAAQS.
2. Non-Attainment in a Designated Air Quality Maintenance Area - one
or more of the NAAQS are being contravened and the area is
located in an AQMA. Where this is true, the following statement
may be included in the EA:
The (NYSDEC/NJDEP/COMMONWEALTH of PR.) and the U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency (USEPA) have designated the Air
Quality Control Region, which includes (city name), as an Air
Quality Maintenance area. Within (city name). National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for (name of pollutants) are being
contravened. State Implementation Plans (SIP's) have been or are
being prepared by the state of which provide measures
for the attainment of NAAQS. An analysis has shown that the
proposed (modifications, construction, etc.) will not by itself
result in contravention of NAAQS.
3. Non-Attainment in a Non-designated AQMA - One or more of the
NAAQS are being contravened. Where this is true, the following
statement may be included in the EA:
The City of in County, is located in the
Air Quality Control Region which has been designated
by (NYSDEC/NJDEP/ Commonwealth of P.R.) and the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency. Within (city name), National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for (name of pollutant(s)) are
being contravened. State implementation plans (SIPs) have been
or are being prepared by the state of , which provide
measures for the attainment of NAAQS. An analysis has shown that
the proposed (modifications, construction, etc.) will not by
itself result in contravention of NAAQS.
B5-1
-------
APPENDIX C
-------
APPENDIX C
USDA FARMLAND PROTECTION FORM. AND REGULATIONS
-------
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 52, No. 9
Wednesday, lanuary 14. 1987
This section ot the FEDERAL REGJST
contains notices to the puMc of the
proposed issuance of rules and
regulations. The ptxpose of these note s
is to give interested persons an
opportunity to participate In the rule
making prior to the adoption of the firs!
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
SoB Conservation Service
7 CFR Part 650
Revision of Farmland Protection Po.l
Act
lanuary 8, 1967.
AGENCY: Soil Conservation Service.
Agriculture.
action: Proposed rule.
summary: The United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA or
Department) amend* its rale for
implementing the Farmland Protection
Policy Act to require progress reports,
enable governors to bring action to
enforce the requirements of the Act,
include a section omitted by clerical
error, revise how Federal agencies apply
the Act and revise the definition of
farmland. These amendments are
necessary in order to comply with
amendments to the Farmland Protection
Policy Act (FPPA) made by Title XII of
the Food Security Act of 1965, Pub. L.
99-198. December 23,1985, and to clarify
several provisions of the existing rule.
This rule will revise Part 650 of Title 7
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
DATE: Written comments on this
proposed rule mast be receired on or
before February 27,1987.
address: Send written comments to
Sherman L. Lewis, Dtrector;
Conservation Planning end Application
Division, Soil Conservation Service, P.O.
Box 2890, Washington, DC 20013.
for further information contact:
Sherman L Lewis. Director,
Conservation Planning and Application
Division. Soil Conservation. P.O. Box
2890, Washington. DC 20013, telephone
202-382-1645.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rale
has been reviewed under USDA
procedures established in accordance
with provisions of Departmental
Regulation 1512-1 and has been
designated "no a-major." The Assistant
Secretary for Natural Resources and
Environment has determined that this
action will not have an economic impact
on the economy of $100 million or more;
result in a major increase in costs or
prices for consumers, individual
industries, Federal, State, or local
government agencies, or geographic
regions; or result in significant adverse
affects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
on the ability of U.S.-based enterprises
to compete with foreign-based
enterprises in domestic or export
markets. This rule does not contain
information collection requirements that
require approval by the Office of
Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.
This document has been prepared in
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
National Resources and Environment,
USDA. with the assistance of the
Conservation Planning and Application
Division of the Soil Conservation
Service.
Following are the six amendments
made to the rule as published on July 5.
1984 in the Federal Register, 49 FR 27724,
and found in 7 CFR Part 658:
1. Section 658.4 is amended by adding
a new paragraph (g), requiring federal
agencies to return a copy of the
Farmland Conversion Impact Rating
Form (AD-1006) to the local Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) field office
after a decision relating to farmland
conversion has been made by the
Federal agency.
2. Section 656.7 is amended by adding
a new paragraph (d). which requires
each Federal agency to report to the
Chief of the Soil Conservation Service
by November 15 of each year on
progress made during the prior fiscal
year to implement paragraphs (a) and
(b) of §658.6.
3. Paragraph (b) of 9 658.7, which was
omitted by clerical mistake in the final
published rule, is added.
4. Paragraph (d) of ( 658.3 is revised to
provide that where a State policy or
program to protect farmland exists, the
Governor of such a State may bring
action in the Federal district court to
enforce the requirements of the FPPA.
5. Paragraph (c) of { 658J is amended
to provide that if. after consideration of
the adverse effects and suggested
alternatives, a landowner wants to
proceed with conversion of prime or
unique farmland, a Federal agency is not
precluded from providing assistance for
such conversion.
6. Paragraph (a) of S 656.2 is amended
to provide that prime farmland
"committed to urban development or
water storage" includes all such land
that receives a combined score of 160
points or less from the land evaluation
and site assessment criteria.
The first proposed revision is intended
to comply with the amendment to the
FPPA made by section 1255, Title Xli,
Pub. L. 99-198 (December 23.1965).
which requires USDA to make annual
reports to Congress beginning January 1.
1987 on (a) the effects, if any, of Federal
programs, authorities, and
administrative activities with respect to
the protection of United States faimiand
and (b) the results of the review of
existing policies and procedures by all
Federal agencies to determine where
provisions thereof will prevent such
units of the Federal government from
taking appropriate action to comply fully
with the FPPA. To meet these two
annual reporting requirements, i 658.4 of
the rule is amended by adding a new
paragraph (g). requiring Federal
agencies to return a copy of the
Farmland Conversion Impact Rating
Form (AD-1006) to the local SCS field
office after a decision relating to
farmland conversion has been made by
the Federal agencies. The returned copy
of the forms will be used by the SCS to
make an annual report on Federal
agency progress in implementing the
FPPA.
Each SCS State office will report to
the SCS National Headquartere where a
national report to Congress will be
prepared.
To meet the second reporting
requirement concerning Federal
agencies' review of their internal policy
and procedures, the new rule will
require Federal agencies to report to the
Chief of SCS their progress in reviewing
their policies and procedures related to
farmland protection and make revisions
as required.
The third revision would add
paragraph (b) to { 658.8, setting out the
requirements for each Federal agency,
as appropriate, to develop proposals for
action to bring its programs, authorities,
and administrative activities into
conformity with the purpose and
policies of the FPPA. This section was
not pubished in the final rule that was
C-l
-------
1466 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 9 / Wednesday. January 14. 1987 / Proposed^Rulea
published on July 5.1984. a9 it was
omitted by clerical mistake.
The fourth revision is required by
section 1255 of Pub. L 99-198, which
amended the FPPA to permit the
Governor of a State that has a policy or
program to protect farmland to bring an
action in the Federal district court of the
district in which a Federal program is
propsoed to enforce the requirements of
the FPPA. Previously, the FPPA and 7
CFR 656.3(d) prohibited any action,
either legal or equitable, by any State,
unit of local government, or any person
or class of persons challenging a Federal
project, program, or other activity that
may affect farmland.
The proposed amendment conforms to
the amended FPPA and removes the
terms "any state, unit of local
government" from the general
prohibition against causes of action and
recognizes the right of the Governor of
an affected State that has the program
or policy to protect farmland to bring an
action to protect such a program or
policy under the FPPA.
The fifth amendment revises how
Federal agencies apply the FPPA. In its
present form S 658.3(c) provides:
The Act and these regulations do not
authorize the Federal Government in any
way to regulate the use of private or
nonfederal land, or in any way affect the
property rights of owners of such land. The
Act and these regulations do not provide
authority for the withholding of Federal
assistance to convert farmland to
nonagricultural uses. In cases where either a
private party or a nonfederal unit of
government applies for Federal assistance to
convert farmland to a nonagricultural use. the
Federal agency should use the criteria set
forth in this part to identify and take into
account any adverse effects on farmland of
the assistance requested and develop
alternative actions that could avoid or
mitigate such adverse effects. If. after
consideration of the adverse effects and
suggested alternatives, the applicant wants to
proceed with the conversion, the Federal
agency may not. on the basi9 of the Act or
these regulations, refuse to provide the
requested assistance.
The first sentence of paragraph (c)
sets forth the statement of limitation
provided in section 1547(a) of the FPPA.
7 U.S.C. 4208(a). The second and final
sentences of paragraph (c) reflect the
fact that the FPPA does not expressly
require or authorize the withholding of
Federal assistance for the conversion of
farmland. They were not intended to
imply that the withholding of such
assistance would constitute regulation
of private or nonfederal land or be
deemed to have an effect on related
property rights, as that is clearly -
illogical and contrary to established
case law.
In describing the intended effect of
analogous legislation expressly
proyiding for the withholding of federal
assistance to convert wetlands, the
Congress offered pertinent interpretive
instruction: "It is intended that these
provisions not be construed, nor
implemented in any way to regulate the
use of private or nonfederal land, or in
any way affect the property rights of the
owners of such lands. The Committee
(of the Senate on Agriculture. Nutrition,
and Forestry) intends to continue the
policy expressed in the statement of
limitations in the Farmland Protection
Policy Act, Subtitle I, Pub. L. 97-98
(December 22,1981)." Senate Report No.
145. 99th Congress. 1st Session. 303-304.
reprinted in 1985. U.S. Code Cong. & Ad.
News 1969-1970 (discussing the wetland
conservation provisions of S. 1714
which, 89 adopted as amendments to
H.R. 2100. were enacted as Subtitle C,
Title XII of the Food Security Act of
1985. Pub. L. 99-198 [December 23.1986),
16 U.S.C. 3812-3823).
Whereas the Food Security Act of
1985 expressly limits the providing of
Federal assistance related to the
conversion of wetlands, the FPPA is
silent, leaving to the discretion of each
affected Federal agency the
determination of whether the providing
or the denial of Federal assistance for
farmland conversion will, in a given
situation, comply with the policy and
purpose of the FPPA.
Paragraph (c) of { 658.3. as presently
written, may be misread as a limitation
on the previously described discretion
provided by Congress to Federal
agencies. To prevent such
misinterpretation and misapplication of
the FPPA. the Department believes that
paragraph (c) should be amended to
recognize that discretion and the general
process through which it is exercised.
In making a decision on whether or
not to provide assistance to convert
farmland, the Federal agency will take
into consideration: The degree to which
the conversion is irreversible: whether,
in light of available alternatives, the
conversion is necessary: whether the
conversion is. to the extent practicable,
compatible with state, local, and private
programs and policies to preserve
farmland: and whether the importance
of preserving the Nation's farmland is
outweighed by other national interests.
The FPPA requires each Federal entity
to make determinations as to how the
Act applies to its programs and
activities, and make an annual report on
progress in making that determination.
The assessment of the adverse impacts
of farmland conversion will be made by
the assisting agency and alternatives
will be suggested to the requesting
landowner. Federal assistance,
however, would no) be absolutely
precluded should the landowner decide
to proceed with conversion. The
decision of whether or not to provide
such assistance will be made by the
Federal agency, under its own policies
and rules and in light of the facts
presented by the request for assistance.
Likewise, the Department believes
that Congress intended to allow a
Federal agency to withhold assistance if
the agency determined'that alternative
actions were available, and if providing
assistance would contravene the FPPA.
If a Federal agency decides to withhold
assistance for conversion of farmland,
the landowner may proceed with such
conversion but without Federal
assistance.
In complying with the FPPA as
amended, each Federal agency will
review current provisions of law,
administrative rules and regulations,
and policies and procedures applicable
to it to determine whether any
provisions will prevent that agency from
taking appropriate action to comply fully
with the FPPA and. as appropriate,
develop proposals for action to bring its
programs, authorities, and
administrative activities into conformity
with the FPPA. Each Federal agency will
also determine how to apply the Act
once evaluations are made, alternatives
are considered, and recommendations
are made to landowners with regard to
specific activities. The agencies will
report annually to the Chief of the Soil
Conservation Service regarding these
activities and progress on revisions and
determinations.
The last change in the amended rule is
in the definition of prime farmland,
specifically the "committed to urban"
aspect of the definition. The present rule
defines prime farmland committed to
urban development or water storage as
including "all such land that has been
designated for commercial or industrial
use or residential use that is not
intended at the same time to protect
farmland in (1) zoning code of ordinance
adopted by a State or unit of local
government (2) a comprehensive land
use plan which has expressly been
either adopted or reviewed in its
entirety by the unit of local government
in whose jurisdiction it is operative
within 10 years proceeding
implementation of the particular Federal
project."
This definition presents three major
problems:
(1) It is inconsistent with the
definitions of prime farmland used in
almost all other State and Federal
programs which use the definition.
C-2
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 9 / Wednesday. January 14. 1987 / Proposed Rules 1467
(2) It requires the SCS district
conservationists to review local plans
-------
1468 Federal Register / Vol.
(d) Section 1548 of the Act. as
amended. 7 U.S.C. 4209. states that the
Act shall not be deemed to provide a
basis for any action, either legal or
equitable, by any person or class of
persons challenging a federal project,
program, or other activity that may
affect farmland. Neither the Act nor this
rule, therefore, shall affored any basis
for such an action.
However, the Governor of an affected
Stale, «these a State policy or program
exists to protect farmland, may bring an
action in the Federal district court of the
district where a Federal program is
proposed to enforce the requirements of
section 1541 or the FPPA, 7 U.S.C. 4202,
and regulations issued pnmmnt to that
section.
4. Section 868.4 is amended by addms
a new paragraph (gj to read as fallows:
$ 656.4 CUtktellnM for us« ol CfttMte.
• * • « •
(gj Te steel reporting requirements of
8ecitaa ISM of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 4207,
and for data collection purposes, a copy
of the farmland conversion impact rating
Form AD-1006 shall be retured by the
Federal agency to the SCS field office
after a final decision on the project has
been made.
5. Section 636.7 iB amended by adding
two new paragraphs (b) and (d] to read
as follows:
8 658.7 USDA tnUMM with Federal
agencies' reviews of policies and
procedures.
(b) Section 1542(b) of the Act 7 U.S.C.
4203 states, "each department, agency,
independent commission, or other unit
of the Federal government, with
assistance of the Department of
Agriculture, shall, as appropriate,
develop proposals for action to bring its
programs, authorities, and
administrative activities into conformity
with the purpose and policy of this
subtitle."
(b) To meet reporting requirements of
section 1546 of the Act, 7 U.&jC. 4207.
and for data collection purposes, each
Federal agency shall report to the Chief
of the Soil Conservation Service by
November 15tb of each year on progress
made during the prior fiscal year to
implement sections 1542 (a) and (b) of
the Act. 7 U.S.C. 4203 (a) and (b).
Joseph VK, Haas,
Associate Chief. SoftCcmservation Service.
[FROoc. 87-691 Filed 1-13-87; 8:45 am|
Btiuwa cooe mio-is-m
C-4
-------
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
"\RT I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Data Of Land Evaluation Raquatt
umt Of Projact
Fadaral Agancy Involvad
Propottd Land Uta
County And Stat*
Dai« Raauasi FUcttvbd by &CS
PART II <"7^ c6o?/>/!etTeg* Ratra Sin ¦
Ajrioum Of 6*«nian
0»lf L**d tvaJoroaoRnamad 0y $CS
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Sit* A
Alternative
Site B
Site Hating
Site C
S't* 0
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C. Total Acres In Site
PART IV (To be completed by SC$J Land Evaluation lnfbrmat>co
A,' Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland /i;:x
¦ D. Ptrcantjg* Of ^arrr>)»mf In Govt. Junttfction With Saftit Or ttighar Rt
-------
STEPS IN THE PROCESSING THE FARMLAND AND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM
Step 1 - Federal agencies involved in proposed projects that may convert farmland, as defined In the Farmland Protect:?-1
Policy Act (FPPA) to nonagricultural uses, will initially complete Parts I and III of the form.
Step 2 - Originator will send copies A, B and C, together with maps indicating locations of site(s), to the Soil ConservatiL/.
Service (SCS) local field office and retain copy D for theii files. (Note: SCS has a field office in most co nties in the U S. "The
field office is usuaLIy located in the county seat. A list of field office locations are available from the SCS "'ate Conservation^
in each state).
Step 3 — SCS will, within 45 calendar days after receipt of form, make a determination as to whether the site(s) of the pro-
posed project contains prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland.
Step 4 — In cases where farmland covered by the FPPA will be converted by the proposed project, SCS field offices will com-
plete Parts II, IV and V of the form.
Step 5 — SCS will return copy A and B of the form to the Federal agency involved in the project. (Copy C will be retained for
SCS records).
Step 6 - The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will complete Parts VI and VII of the form.
Step 7 - The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will make a determination as to whether the proposed conver-
sion is consistent with the FPPA and the agency's internal polices.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM
Part I: In completing the "County And State" questions list all the local governments that are responsible
for local land use controls where site(s) are to be evaluated.
Part III: In completing item B (Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly), include the following:
1. Acres not being directly converted but that would no longer be capable of being farmed after the conver-
sion, because the conversion would restrict access to them.
2. Acres planned to receive services from an infrastructure project as indicated in the project justification
(e.g. highways, utilities) th3t will cause a direct conversion.
Part VI: Do not complete Part VI if a local site assessment is used.
Assign the maximum points for each site assessment criterion as shown in §658.5(b) of CFR. In cases of
corridor-type projects such as transportation, powcrline and flood control, criteria #5 and #6 will not apply
and will be weighted zero, however, criterion #8 will be weighted a maximum of 25 points, and criterion
~1 1 a maximum of 25 points.
Individual Federal agencies at the national level, may assign relative weights among the 13 site assessment
criteria other than those shown in the FPPA rule. In all cases where other weights are assigned, relative adjust-
ments must be made to maintain the maximum total weight points at 160.
In rating alternative sites. Federal agencies shall consider each of the criteria and assign points within the
limits established in the FPPA rule. Sites most suitable for protection under these criteria will receive the
highest total scores, and sites least suitable, the lowest scores.
Part VII: In computing the "Total Site Assessment Points", where a State or local site assessment is used
and the total maximum number of points is other than 160, adjust the site assessment points to a base of 1 60.
Example: if the Site Assessment maximum is 200 points; and alternative Site "A" is rated 180 points:
Total points assigned Site A = 1 80 x 1 60 = 144 points for Site "A."
Maximum points possible 200
C-6
-------
APPENDIX D
-------
APPENDIX D
AGENCY CONTACTS
-------
APPENDIX D
CONTACTS
Federal Agencies:
U.S. Department of Interior
7 10
Regional Environmental Offices '
Department of the Interior
1500 Custom House
165 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
7 1G
Regional Environmental Offices '
Department of the Interior
Suite 1034, Russell Federal Building
75 Spring Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
(for Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands)
Fish and Wildlife Service7'*^
P.O. Box 534
705 White Horse Pike
Absecon, New Jersey 08201
Fish and Wildlife Service7
Division of Ecological Services
100 Grange Place
Cortland, New York 13045
q in
U.S. Department of the Interior '
Heritage Conservation and
Recreation Service
600 Arch Street - Room 9310
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Regional Environmental Offices
Department of the Interior
Custom House, Room 502
200 Chestnut Street
Phil delphia, PA 19106 (for NJ)
7,10
A "t
Fish and Wildlife Service ''
P.O. Box 510
Boqueron, Puerto Rico 00622
Fish and Wildlife Service'
Endangered Species Office
274 Art Museum Drive
Jacksonville, FL 32207
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Marine Fisheries Service7
Environmental Assessment Branch
7 Pleasant Street
Gloucester, MA 01930
Office of Coastal Zone Management7
Herbert Hoover Building
14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.
Washington, D.C. 20230-0001
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
2
Environmental Impacts Branch
26 Federal Plaza, Room 500
New York, NY 10298
D-l
National Marine Fisheries Service
Environmental Assessment Branch
Duval Building
9450 Gandy Street
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
n
Bureau of Economic Analysis'
Washington, D.C. 20230
-------
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
1,3
North Atlantic Division
90 Church Street
New York, New York 10278
(also contact appropriate district office)
1 3
Federal Emergency Management Agency '
Insurance and Mitigation Branch
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10278
O If]
U.S. Department of Agriculture '
O
Soil Conservation Service
State Conservationist
1370 Hamilton Street
P.O. Box 219
Somerset. New Jersey 08873
g
Soil Conservation Service
Caribbean Area Office
Federal Office Building
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00917
Territorial Authorities:
Delaware River Basin Commission
Box 7360
West Trent.or,, NJ 08628
10
South Atlantic Division
510 Title Building
30 Pryor Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
1,3
Soil Conservation Service
State Conservationist
100 Clinton Street
Syracuse, New York
State Agencies:
Q
New Jersey Department of Agriculture
P.O. Box CN-330
Trenton, NJ 08625
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
Division cf Fish, Game and She!1fisheries/
P.O. Box 1809
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
Division of Coastal Resources^
P.O. Box 1889
Trenton, Mew Jersey 08625
2 ? 4 5 10
Division of Water Resources ' ' ' '
P.O. Box CN-029
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
D-2
-------
Division of Air Resources^
P.O. Box CN-029
Trenton, NJ 08625
g
Office of New Jersey Heritage
Room 707
Labor and Industry Building
John Fitch Plaza
Trenton, NJ 08625
9
New Jersey State Museum
Bureau of Archaeology and Ethnology
215 West State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
g
Pinelands Commission
P.O. Box 7
New Lisbon, New Jersey 08064
O
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
State Campus, Building 8
Albany, New York 12235
3 4 5 10
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ' ' '
Division of Fish and Wildlife^
Delmar, New York 12054
2 5
Division of Flood Control '
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12223
Division of Air Resources^
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12223
o
Construction Grants Management Division"
Cultural Resources Section, Room 432
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233-00C1
New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)^
Division of Historic Preservation
Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
Agency Building #1, 13th Floor
Empire State Plaza
Albany, New York 12238
New York Department of State^
Coastal Management Program
State of New York
Albany, New York 12231
D-3
-------
o
Puerto Rico Department of Agriculture
Avenida Fernandez Ouncos, Pda. 19
Santurce, Puerto Rico 00910
Puerto Rico Department of Natural Resources^'^'^,^,^,11
P.O. Box 5887
Puerto de Tierra
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00906
14 6
Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board * '
204 del Parque
Santurce, Puerto Rico 00907
O
Puerto Rico Planning Board*"
Central Government Building
Santurce, Puerto Rico 00907
O
Virgin Islands Department of Agriculture
P.O. Box "U"
Kingshill, St. Croix, VI 00850
Virgin Islands Department of Environmental Protection
Division of Coastal Zone Management11
P.O. Box 4340
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00801
Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources
Division of Fish and Wildlife^
P.O. Box 4339
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00801
g
Bureau of Libraries and Museums
Box 390
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00801
Division of Natural Resources^'^'^'^
P.O. Box 4399
St. Thomas, VI 0C801
NOTES FOR APPENDIX D:
2
-Population Projections and Environmental Constraints Analysis
. Water Resources
r Wetlands
Floodplains
Air Qual ity
R Endangered Species
q Prime Agricultural Lands
...Cultural Resources
Wild and Scenic Rivers
Coastal Zones
D-4
-------
APPENDIX E
-------
APPENDIX E
ENDANGERED SPECIES INFORMATION
-------
APPENDIX E
ENDANGERED SPECIES
This Appendix contains information regarding environmental review
procedures relative to endangered species. The following items are
included:
Sample section 7 informal consultation initiation letter,
Guidelines for Conducting a Biological Assessment,
Lists of federally listed and proposed endangered and threatened
species in EPA-Region II States (New York, New Jersey, Puerto
Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands), and
Lists of designated critical habitats.
It should be noted that there is no designated critical habitat for
species in New York or New Jersey.
E-l
-------
SAMPLE SECTION 7 CONSULTATION LETTER
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION I I
26 FEDERAL PLAZA
NEW YORK NEW YORK 10278
DEC 0 2 1985
Mr. John Hall
Environmental Assessment Branch
National Marine Fisheries Service
3500 Delwood Beach Road
Panama City, Florida, 32407
Dear Mr. Hall:
This letter is intended to initiate informal consultation with you in regard
to the environmental impact statement (EIS) being prepared by the U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the Cruz Eay, St. John 201 Facilities Plan.
The project is expected to result in the award of a federal grant for the
design and construction of wastewater collection, transmission, and treatment
facilities for Cruz Bay, St. John. A brief sunmary of the proposed project is
presented in the notice of intent (NOI), which was issued on October 28, 1985,
and forwarded to you under separate cover.
EPA has identified the green, hawksbill, and leatherback sea turtles and the
brown pelican as federally listed endangered and threatened species that occur
in the project's study area. In compliance with the mandate of Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, EPA is requesting a written
statement frcm you indicating whether any other endangered or threatened species
which are listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the project area.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please call Ms.
Laura Lcxnbardo of my staff at (212) 264-5387. Vfe sincerely appreciate your
assistance in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
William P. Lawler, P.E., Chief
Environmental Analysis Section
Environmental Impacts Branch
cc: NMFS, St. Petersburg, FL
R. Pace, USFWS
C. Vfebb, CEM
E-2
-------
Guidelines for Conducting a Biological Assessment
(1) Conduct a scientifically sound on-site inspection of the area
affected by the action. Unless otherwise directed by the
Service, include a detailed survey of the area to determine if
listed or proposed species are present or occur seasonally and
whether suitable habitat exists within the area for either
expanding the existing population or reintroducing a new
population.
(2) Interview recognized experts on the species listed, including
those within the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine
Fisheries Service, state conservation agencies, universities and
others who may have data not yet found in scientific literature.
(3) Review literature and other scientific data to determine the
species distribution, habitat needs, and other biological
requirements.
(4) Review and analyze the effects of the action on the species, in
terms of individuals and population, including consideration of
the cumulative effects of the action on the species and habitat.
(5) Analyze alternative actions that may provide conservation
measures.
(6) Conduct any studies necessary to fulfill the requirements of (1)
through (5) above.
(7) Review any other information.
Source: US Fish and Wildlife Service, Correspondence in Section 7
Consultations.
E-3
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
MEW YORK
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
KISHES:
Sturgeon, shortnose
REPTILES:
Turtle, green
Turtle, hawksbill
Turtle, leatherback
Turtle, loggerhead
Turtle, Atlantic
ridlev
Acipenser brevirostrum
Chelonia mydas T
Eretmochelys imbricata E
Dermochelys coriacea E
Caretta caretta T
Lepidochelys kempii E
Hudson River and other
Atlantic Coastal rivers
Oceanic summer visitor
coastal waters
Oceanic summer visitor
coastal waters
Oceanic summer resident
coastal waters
Oceanic summer resident
coastal waters
Oceanic summer resident
coastal waters
BIRDS:
Eagle, bald
Falcon, American
peregrine
Falcon, Arctic
Plover, Piping
Haliaeetus leucocephalus E
Falco peregrinus anatum E
Falco peregrinus tundrius E
Charadrius melopus
Entire state - no nesting
Entire state -
re-establishment to
former breeding range in
progress
Entire state migratory -
no-nesting
Primarily Long Island
MAMMALS:
Bat, Indiana
Cougar, eastern
k'hale, blue
Myotis sodalis E
Felis concolor couguar E
Balaenoptera musculus E
Entire state
Entire state
extinct
Oceanic
probably
E-4
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
NEW YORK (Cont'd.)
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
Whale, finback
Whale, humpback
Whale, right
Whale, Sei
Whale, sperm
Balaenoptera physalus E Oceanic
Megaptera novaeangliae E Oceanic
Eubalaena glacialis E Oceanic
Balaenoptera boreal is E Oceanic
Physeter catodon E Oceanic
KOLUSKS:
Snai1, chittenango
ovate amber
Suiccinea ovali s
chittenangoensis
Madison County
PLANTS:
Monkshood, northern wild
Pogonia, small
worled
Aconitum noveboracense T
Isotria medeoloides E
Chenango, Ulster Counties
Nassau, Onondaga,
Rockland, Suffolk,
Ulster, Washington
Counties
E-5
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
NEW JERSEY
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
Commcn Name
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
FISHES:
Sturgeon, shortnose
Acipenser brevirostrum
Hudson and Delaware Rivers
plus other Atlantic
Coastal Rivers
REPTILES:
Turtle, green
Turtle, hawksbill
Turtle, leatherback
Turtle, loggerhead
Turtle, Atlantic
ridley
Chelonia mydas T
Eretmochelysimbri cata E
Dermochelys coriacea E
Caretta caretta T
Lepidochelys kempii
Oceanic summer visitor
coastal waters
Oceanic summer visitor
coastal waters
Oceanic summer visitor
coastal waters
Oceanic summer resident
coastal waters rarely
nests: Cape May and
Atlantic Counties
Oceanic summer resident
coastal waters
BIRDS:
Eagle, bald
Falcon, American
peregrine
Falcon, Arctic
peregrine
Plover, Piping
Haliaeetus leucocephalus E
Falco peregrinus anatum E
Falco peregrinus tundrius F
Charadrius melodus T
Entire state
Entire state -
re-establishment to
former breeding range
iri progress
Entire state migratory
no-nesting
Coastal Counties
E-6
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
NEW JERSEY (Cont'd.)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
MAMMALS:
Cougar, eastern
Whale, blue
Whale, finback
Whale, humpback
Whale, right
Whale, Sei
Whale, sperm
Felis concolor cougar E
Balaenoptera musculus E
Balaenoptera physalus E
Megaptera novaeangliae E
Eubalaena glacial is E
Balaenoptera boreal is E
Physeter catodon E
Entire state
extinct
Oceanic
Oceanic
Oceanic
Oceanic
Oceanic
Oceanic
- probably
JLUSKS:
None
PLANTS:
Pogonia, small
worled
Isotria medeoloides
Bergen, Hunterdon,
Monmouth, Passaic,
Sussex, Counties
E-7
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
PUERTO RICO
Common Name
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
REPTILES:
Giant Anole
Anolis roosevelti
E
Culebra Island
Mona Boa
Epicrates monensis
monensis
T
Mona Island
Puerto Rico Boa
Epicrates inornatus
E
Entire Island
Virgin Islands Tree
Boa
Epicerates monensis granti
E
Cayo Diablo
Monito Gecko
Sphaerodactylus
micropthecus
E
Monito Island
Mona Ground Iguana
Cyclura stejnegeri
T
Mona Island
Green Turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
Coastal Waters
Hawksbill Turtle
Eretmochelys imbricata
E
Coastal Waters
Leatherback Turtle
Dermochelys coriacea
E
Coastal Waters
Loggerhead Turtle
Caretta caretta
T
Coastal Waters
AMPHIBIANS:
Golden Coqui
Eleutherodactylus
jasperi
T
Southeast Puert(
Puerto Rico Crested
Toad
Peltophrayne lemur Proposed T
(immi nent)
BIRDS:
Arctic Peregrine Falcon
Falco peregrinus tundrius
T
Entire Island
PR Parrott
Amazona vittata
E
Luquillo Forest
Brown Pelican
Pelecanus occidentals
E
Coast
PR Plain Pigeon
Columba inornuta wetmorei
E
Cidra
Piping Plover
Charadrius melodus
T
Coast
E-8
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
PUERTO RICO (Cont'd.)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Di stribution
PR Nightjar Caprimulgus noctitherus E
(formerly PP. whipporwill)
Yellow Shouldered Blackbird Agelaius xanthonus
Roseate Tern
Sterna dougallii
douaal1n
Proposed T
Southwest
East and southwest
Puerto Rico; Mona Island
MAMMALS:
West Indian Manatee
Finback Whale
Humpback Whale
Sei Whale
Sperm Whale
Trichechus manatus E
Balaenoptera physalus E
Megaptera novaeangliae E
Balaenoptera borealis E
Physeter catodon E
Coastal waters,
especially south
Coastal waters
Coastal waters
Coastal waters
Coastal waters
PLANTS:
Beautiful Goetzea
Prickly Ash
Vahl's Boxwood
Wheeler's Peperomia
Palo de Ram6n
Elfon Tree Fern
Cook's Hoily
Higuero de Sierra
Goetzea elegans E
Zanthoxylum thomasianum E
Boxus vahli E
Peperomia wheelerii E
Banara Vanderbiltii E
Cyathea dryopteroides
Ilex cookii
Near Isabela
Guajataca and south-
east of Coamo
Near Rincon and
Bayamon
Culebra Island
Near Bayamon
Proposed E (imminent)
Proposed E (imminent)
Crescentia portricensis Proposed E (imminent)
E-9
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
PUERTO RICO (Cont'd.)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
Palo de Nigua
Bariacho
Cornutia obobata
Trichilia triachantha
Daphnophis hellerana
Proposed E
Proposed E
Draft Proposed E
E-10
-------
FEDERALLY LISTED OR. PROPOSED SPECIES
T - Threatened
E - Endangered
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Distribution
REPTILES:
VI Tree Boa
St. Croix Ground Lizard
Green Turtle
HawksbiH Turtle
Leatherback Turtle
Loggerhead Turtle
BIRDS:
Brown Pelican
Roseate Tern
MAMMALS:
Fin Whale
Humpback Whale
Sei Whale
Sperm Whale
PLANTS:
Pricklv Ash
Epicarates monensis E
Ameiva polops E
CheIonia mydas T
Eretmochelys imbricata E
Dermochelys coriacea E
Caretta caretta T
Pelecanus occidental is E
Sterna dougal1i i Proposed T
dougallii
Balaenoptera physalus E
Megaptera novaeangliae E
Balaenoptera boreal is E
Physeter catodon E
Zanthoxylum thomasianum E
East side of St. Thomas
St. Thomas, St. John
E-ll
-------
LIST OF DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITATS
HEW JERSEY: None
NEW YORK: None
PUERTO RICO:
SPECIES
Giant Anole
Mona Boa
Monito Gecko
Mona Ground Iguana
Hawksbill Turtle
Golden Coqui
Yellow Shouldered
Blackbi rd
CRITICAL HABITAT
Culebra Island, north side of Monte Resaca
Mona Island in its entirety
Monito Island in its entirety
Mona Island in its entirety
Mona Island, all areas of beachfront
on the west, south, and east sides of
the Island from mean high tide inland
to a point 150 meters from the shore.
Culebra Island, beachfront on Playa
Brava, Playa Resaca, and Playa Larga.
Caye Norte (off Culebra), beachfront
on South Beach.
Culebrita Island, all beachfront on
the southwest facing shore, east
facing shore, end northwest facing
shore.
Southeast Puerto Rico (inland), elevations
above 700 meters on Cerro Avispa, Monte el
Gato and Sierra de Cayey.
Mona Island, in its entirety
Southwest Puerto Rico, and Roosevelt
Roads Naval Station
E-12
-------
LIST OF DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITATS
.iRGIN ISLANDS:
SPECIES
CRITICAL HABITAT
St. Croix Ground Lizard
Green Cay, Protestant Cay, off the north
coast of St. Croix.
Leatherback Turtle
Sandy Point Beach on the western end of
St. Croix, beachfront from mean high tide
to .2 miles inland.
E-13
-------
APPENDIX F
-------
APPENDIX F
LIST OF WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
-------
APPENDIX F
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
This appendix contains a list of rivers in the EPA-Region II states
(Mew York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) which are
eligible for inclusion on, Congressionally mandated for further study
for, or designated to the wild and scenic rivers system. This list is
taken from the Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study, prepared by U.S.
Department of the Interior, Heritaqe Conservation and Recreation
Service, Northeast Regional Office (Philadelphia, PA). There are no
eligible, mandated or designated rivers in Puerto Rico or in the U.S.
Virgin Islands.
F-l
-------
NEW JERSEY
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
River
Segment
Segment Length Status
Delaware R.
Great Egg Harbor R.
- Tuckahoe R.
- Middle R.
Great Egg Harbor R.
Mullica R.
- Wading R.
- E. Br. Oswego R.
- W. Br. Oswego R.
- Batso R.
Cedar Ck.
Lamington - Black R.
Delaware R.
Delaware R.
Tohickon Ck.
Delaware R.
- Flat Brook
Maurice R.
Kanumuskin R.
Menantico Ck.
Delaware Bay to Salem Nuclear 4 mi. eligible
Power Plant
Great Egg Harbor Bay to S. of 10 mi. eligible
May's Landing
Great Egg Harbor to Tuckahoe 9.5 mi. eligible
Great Egg Harbor Bay to N. of 7.2 mi. eligible
Corbin City
Weymouth to Atlantic City 24 mi. eligible
Expressway
Great Bay to headwaters 48 mi. eligible
Confluence with Mullica to 11 mi. eligible
E. & W. Branches
E. W. Branch to Sim Place 12 mi. eligible
Reservoir
E. & W. Branch to near Rt. 563 13 mi. eligible
Mullica R. to Hampton 20 mi. eligible
Lanoka Harbor to Bamber Lake 14 mi. eligible
N. Branch Raritan to Randolph 25 mi. eligible
Washington's Crossing to S. of 7 mi. eligible
New Hope
N. of Lambertsvi1le to Frenchtown 14 mi. eligible
Confluence with Delaware R. to 4.5 mi. eligible
Bedmi nster
Delaware Water Gap to Port Jervis 37 mi. listed
Delaware R. to headwaters 28 mi. eligible
Segment undisclosed - proposed
Segment undisclosed - proposed
Segment undisclosed - proposed
-------
¦W YORK
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
Ri ver
Segment
Segment Length Status
Connetquot R.
Schoharie Ck.
Delaware R.
Beaver Kill
Neversink R.
Delaware R.
Catskill CK.
Cattaraugus CK.
-S. Branch
Genese R.
Neversink R.
Schoharie Ck.
Batten Kill
Hudson R.
- Cedar R.
Oswegatchie R.
Raquette R.
Raquette R.
S. Br. Moose R.
- Indian R.
Great So. Bay to LI Expressway 8 mi.
NY State Thruway to Esperance 18 mi.
Hankins to below Hancock 20 mi.
1 mile upstream from Spring 31 mi.
Brook to headwaters
Neversink Reservoir to headwaters to 29 mi.
E. and W. branches
RR Bridge near Sparrow Bush 44 mi.
to Hawkins
So. Cairo to headwaters 32 mi.
Gowanda to Buttermilk CK. 20 mi.
Confluence with Cattaraugus to 6 mi.
Skinner Hollow
Mr. Morris to Portageville 7 mi.
SW of Cuddlebackvilie to Rockhill 16 mi.
Near Vroman's Nose to North of Balboa 18 mi.
Rte 22 to near Arlington
Newcombe to North R.
18 mi.
24 mi.
Hudson R. to near Indian Lake Village 11 mi.
Dam at Wanakena to headwaters 21 mi.
Carry Falls Reservoir to Sols Island 14 mi.
in Piercefield
Drive-in in Harrietstown to Cold R. 21 mi.
Middle Br. to headwaters in Arietta 39 mi.
S. Br. Moose R. to Brooktrout Lake 15 mi.
in Morehouse
eligible
eligible
1isted
eligible
eligible
1isted
eligible
eligible
eligible
el
el
el
el
el
el
el
gible
gible
gible
gible
gible
gible
gible
eli gible
eligible
eligible
eligible
W. Br. Ausable R.
Flume in Wilmington to headwaters
22 mi.
eligible
F-3
-------
APPENDIX G
-------
APPENDIX G
MITIGATION MEASURES/SPECIAL GRANT CONDITIONS
-------
APPENDIX G1
MITIGATION MEASURES
-------
APPENDIX G1
MITIGATION MEASURES
EPA's Procedures and Requirements Implementing the National Environ-
mental Policy Act for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction
Grants Program (40 CFR 6) requires that the applicant develop and
implement measures to lessen or avoid potential adverse project
impacts. Section 6.506 (b)(7) of these regulations states that
"structural and nonstructural measures, directly or indirectly related
to the facilities plan, to mitigate or eliminate adverse effects on
the human and natural environments shall be identified during the
environmental review." EPA may not approved a facilities plan or
federal assistance for a wastewater facilities project if the appli-
cant has not agreed to make any changes or mitigation measures speci-
fied in the FNSI or Record of Decision for the EIS.
This Appendix presents a list of mitigation measures that are commonly
recommended for lessening or avoiding impacts from wastewater facili-
ties projects. The list is not all-inclusive but is rather intended
as a guidance tool for environmental review officials.
It is important to note that there is no substitute for avoiding
impacts. Mitigation measures are recommended only when there are no
practicable alternatives to those which may cause particular impacts.
1. General Erosion/Sedimentation, Water Quality and Ecology -
Related Measures
The construction site selection should consider potential
soil erosion and sediment losses;
The project plan and layout should be designed to fit the
local topography and soil conditions;
Natural vegetation should be retained wherever feasible and,
when appropriate, land grading and excavating should be kept
to rights-of-way and to a minimum in order to reduce the
possibility of creating excessive runoff and erosion prob-
1 ems;
Appropriate structural (e.g., sediment basins, staked
haybales, riprap) or agronomic (e.g., seeding, mulching,
liming, fertilizing) practices to control runoff and sedi-
mentation should be provided during and after construction;
Drainage systems should be stabilized as early as possible
to avoid sedimentation problems;
Surface and subsurface drainage patterns should be restored
as early as possible;
Gl-1
-------
Construction entrances, roadways and parking lots should be
stabilized as soon as possible by means of stone pads or
paving;
Construction activities should be scheduled, wherever
possible, for the dry season in order to avoid excessive wet
conditions;
Construction activities (clearing and grading) should net be
started until a firm schedule is known and can be effec-
tively coordinated with the appropriate soil erosion control
measures;
The plan should be consistent with applicable state and
local ordinances and federal non-point source pollution
control guidance.
An erosion and sedimentation control plan should be devel-
oped and implemented in coordination with the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service;
Areas of exposed soil should be periodically wetted;
No chemicals (e.g., calcium chloride) should be used for
dust control;
Exposure of acid soils should be avoided;
Stream crossings should be kept to a minimum;
Temporary construction easements should be kept to a maximum
width of 15 meters (50 feet), and permanent easements should
be kept to 8 meters (25 feet);
Construction roads, pipe storage areas, and spoils storage
areas should be confined to the upland side of the trench
area so that any erosion will go into the trench rather than
being washed into drainageways;
No more than 30 m (10C ft) of trench should be excavated at
one time with pipe placement and backfilling taking place
immediately after trench excavation;
Topsoil should be stockpiled separately for future use as
topdressing for those areas to be restored;
Excess materials resulting from pipe volume displacement
should be saved for use on other parts of system construc-
tion;
Dewatering (if required) should not be discharged directly
to surface waters without first being directed to a tempor-
ary sedimentation basin;
Gl-2
-------
The stream or shore side of the work area throughout the
interceptor route should be continuously lined with either
hay bales or filter fabric;
The work area should be restored, graded, dressed with
topsoil, seeded, and mulched immediately after pipe place-
ment. Open field areas should be planted with indigenous
grasses, and wooded areas should be temporarily seeded with
grass to stabilize the area for ultimate colonization by
nearby indigenous species.
?. Wetland and Floodplain - Related Measures
Fill in wetlands or floodplain should be avoided;
Appropriate treatment levels for discharge to wetlands
should be ensured;
The erosion and sedimentation control measures listed in
Section 1 should be used;
Minimum grading requirements should be used;
The site should be returned to its original contours;
Methods for grading, filling, soil removal arid replacement
should be carefully regulated to reduce sedimentation;
The site should be raised above the floodplain and facili-
ties in floodprone areas should be sealed or otherwise
designed for maximum flood resistance;
Floodplain and wetland vegetation should be maintained to
reduce erosion and sedimentation;
Compensation should be made for fill in floodplain by
excavating upland to provide an equal amount of flood
storage to that which was lost due to filling;
Wetlands that are disturbed or filled should be replaced
with artificial wetlands.*
~Avoidance of existing wetlands is much preferable to mitigating with
artificial wetlands. The latter should be implemented only if there
are no practicable alternatives to wetland disturbance.
Gl-3
-------
3. Marine Water Quality and Ecology fOcean Outfall Disposal) -
Related Measures
Construction should be conducted during calm periods;
Seasonal current variations should be considered (and
construction scheduled appropriately) to avoid impacts on
any sensitive nearby marine ecosystems;
Channel work should be conducted as rapidly as possible
(i.e., all equipment should and materials should be avail-
able on-site at the same time);
Those dredging methods that are least likely to resuspend
fine sediments or create a widespread sediment plume should
be used;
Floating booms and/or silt curtains should be used to
confine turbidity and suspended solids to the immediate
vicinity of the actual dredging activity;
Spoils should be stockpiled directly adjacent to excavated
trench or at a designated upland site;
Excess spoils should be used for other parts of project
construction (e.g., berms), as appropriate;
The length of the open trench shall be minimized.
4. Cultural Resource - Related Measures
Design aspects and construction methods should be examined
to minimize impacts to cultural resources;
Archaeological sites subject to unavoidable impact should be
subject to deta recovery prior to construction;
If unanticipated significant cultural resources are encount-
ered during construction, construction activities should
cease so that the resources may be studied, protected or
recovered;
Architectural or historic properties potentially affected by
the project should be protected, rehabilitated, restored or
repai red.
5. Traffic - Related Measures
Unpaved roadways should be periodically wetted and swept to
prevent hazardous driving conditions;
Construction in or adjacent to roadways should be scheduled
to avoid peak rush hours or seasons;
61-4
-------
Traffic should be rerouted to alternate roadways when
appropriate.
6. Air Quality - Related Measures
Exposed soils should be periodically wetted to reduce the
suspension of dust and air-borne contaminants;
The number and size of construction equipment, and vehicles
should be minimized in order to reduce emissions;
Odor controlling devices should be installed in receiving
tanks, mixing tanks and other facilities. Odor producing
facilities should be enclosed wherever possible;
Facilities should be located as distant from residential and
commerce/business areas as possible.
7. Noise-Related Measures
Construction equipment and wastewater treatment machinery
should be well-muffled and enclosed where possible.
Construction should be scheduled for daylight hours only;
The number and size of construction equipment and vehicles
should be minimized;
Facilities should be surrounded by tall buffer vegetation
whenever possible in order to reduce noise, odor and visual
impacts.
Gl-5
-------
APPENDIX G?
SPECIAL GRANT CONDITIONS
-------
Examples of Special Grant Conditions
Sewer Hookup Restrictions - Environmentally Sensitive Areas
a. The grantee (has submitted) (shall submit) to EPA and the State
Agency) an approvable facilities plan (amendment) including maps
that clearly delineate on block and lot maps all specific vacant
or potentially developable parcels of land within the facilities
planning area that are partially or wholly (within the 100-year
floodplain as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
or) within wetlands as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (no later than 60 days after grant acceptance). (The
grantee should use the most accurate available data to prepare
these maps). They (must) also show which parcels had been
developed prior to the date of this grant.
b. The grantee agrees that, for a period of 50 years from the date
of the grant, no sewer hookup or other connections to the waste-
water facilities included in the facility plan scope of this
grant will be allowed or permitted so as to allow the discharge
of wastewater from any building, facility, or other construction
on any parcel of land partially or wholly within any wetlands (or
the 100-year floodplain) as delineated under (a) above, which
land parcel, as of the date of this grant was undeveloped (i.e.,
upon which no building, facility or other construction, has been
erected or placed) or had the potential for additional develop-
ment, unless approved in writing by the EPA Regional Administra-
tor. This restriction shall not apply (except where encroaching
on wetlands) to waterfront recreation facilities which, by their
nature, must be on waterfront locations.
c. This condition is intended to benefit any person, private organi-
zation or governmental entity which may have an interest in the
avoidance of any future development in the designated areas. Any
such beneficiary, who may otherwise have standing to seek en-
forcement and the right to begin such action in a court of
competent jurisdiction, may seek to enforce compliance with this
condition in the courts of the state against the grantee or any
nonfederal person, organization, or entity subject to this
condition, if notice of intent to seek such enforcement is first
given to the EPA Regional Administrator, (State Agency), the
grantee and affected governmental entities, and if none of those
so noticed initiates corrective action within 90 days of such
notice.
G2-1
-------
d. If the facilities plan amendment required under (a) above deline-
ates any parcels which will be affected by this special condi-
tion, the grantee will conduct a public hearing. The public
hearing record will remain open for 30 days after the hearing to
allow for additional public input.)*
Note: *(d.) does not apply and should not appear if the mapping
was prepared during facility planning and was addressed by
the public hearing on the facilities plan. Other items
within brackets should be included, or deleted to fit the
particular case, (i.e., restrictions applicable to only
wetlands or floodplains, or both).
Cultural Resources
The Grantee has submitted cultural resource survey reports which
indicate that the project may affect cultural resources which are
potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Histo-
rical Places. The Grantee agrees to implement mitigation measures, to
minimize or eliminate adverse impacts to cultural resources, as
required by EPA and the (name of State Agency). These measures shall
be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation. The Grantee shall not, under any
circumstances, initiate construction activities in the affected area
of the project until receiving written notification from the (name of
State Agency) that the cultural resource management process has been
satisfactorily completed.
G2-2
-------
APPENDIX H
-------
APPENDIX H
FACILITIES PLAN REVIEW-NEPA CHECKLIST
(Excerpted from Chapter B-7 of NYSDEC Handbook of Procedures
for Implementing the EPA/NYSDEC Delegation Agreement)
-------
APPENDIX H
Facilities Plan and EID NEPA Checklist for Environmental Review of
Wastewater Facilities Projects
This checklist is intended to be used for reviewing Environmental
Information Documents in order to assure their compliance with re-
quirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other
relevant environmental statutes.
H-l
-------
10/6/83
B-7
Attachment A
FACILITIES PLAN REVIEW NEPA CHECKLIST
Project Identification
Project Ma'Tie County
Project Number Town
List all major reports reviewed (give title, date, and preparer)
Project Description
Project Cost Grant Amount
Existing Environment
In reviewing the Environmental Information Document (EID), it is critical that descriDtions
and graphic presentations (if appropriate) of the inventory of existing environmental
conditions be presented in a context that is relevant to the analysis of project alternatives
to aid in the determination of the primary and secondary environmental impacts of each
proposed acti )n.
The appropriate box (A = adequate, I = inadequate, and N/A = not applicable) should be
checked and an explanation provided (if necessary). Explanations) of items can be referred
to as being in the Environmental Assessment (EA), (give page and oaragraph), or be written
on additional sheets of paper and attached to the checklist.
A I N/A
1. TriefK' describe existing conditions:
Planning or?a olannmg area and political boundaries:
(:i) phvsicai characteristics to include:
Climate - temperature, preciDitation, wind direction and
velocitv
- Specific Weather Conditions - inversions, fog, tornadoes,
hurricanes, and the frequency at which they are likely to
occur
Topographic Weather Conditions - which influence the
weather, major and minor draingage basins, area, slope,
elevation, erosion and deposition
Geolojfv - formations influencing groundwater or surface
¦vaier resources. ( \roas susceptable to earthquakes, sub-
sidence. or other movement - put on map)
Soils - permeability, erosion potential, expansion, com-
paction
Hydrology - relevant surface and groundwater resources:
existing pollution problems
water quality and quantity
water uses find recharge
flood hazard zones
-------
2. List of effluent limitations (NPDES/SPDES permit), which
should be included in EID.
3a. Environmentally Sensitive Areas (description and mapping of
floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes, agricultural lands, coastal
zones, parklands, aquifer recharge areas, endangered species
habitat, cultural resources, other sensitive areas unique to the
study area, etc.).
3b. Map wetlands and floodplains on a scale appropriate for compli-
ance with grant conditions restricting sewer hookups from
undeveloped areas.
Explanation:
4. Organizations involved in planning and financing.
Explanation:
5. Demograohic data - 1930 population, land use patterns, and
major employment generators.
Explanation:
6. Water quality - existing quality, quantity, and uses of surface
and ground water.
Explana tion:
7. Other existing environmental conditions.
\ir quality, noise levels, energy oroduction and consumption
Other related federal or state projects in the area
Plant and animal communities which mav be affected,
especially those containing threatened or endangered
species
Explanation:
H-3
-------
8. Existing wastewater systems and flows (inventory):
a) STP's, on-site systems, effluent disposal (or reuse), sludge
disposal, and flow and waste reduction;
b) Average and peak flow, wastewater characteristics and key
point loads, dry and wet weather flows, combined sewer
flows and by-pass locations, and industrial and commercial
fljw (summary).
Explanation:
9. Infiltration and inflow (estimate). If excessive I/I exists, then
evaluate the cost of treating versus the cost of rehabilitation.
Explanation: _
10. Performance of existing system in terms of effluent quality and
treatment capacity.
E xp la n a t i on:
Assess Future Situation
la. Land use - projected land use patterns and densities (basis of
optimum capacity ana location of facilities).
I'd. Environmental Constraints -\nalvsis based on maooing of
environmentally sensitive areas. Must clearly demonstrate that
the planning (service) area is capable of supporting1 the oro-
jected population (housing) on non-sensitive areas. The method-
ology used to prepare these maps should be given.
Explanation:
2. Demographic and economic projections, (use economic and
population orojections as basis for estimating future wasteloads
and Hows. -Ml projects should be consistent with air quality and
water resources management.) Are population projections in
conformance with the 208 figures (NYS Water Quality Manage-
ment Plan and SIP's within 5"ft)?
Explanation:
H-4
-------
A I NM
3. Forecasts of flow arid wasteloads:
a) Projected population and economic growth;
b) I/I (nonexcessive);
c) Pollutant content .ind flow in existing system;
d) Conbined sewers and respective drainage are;
e^ Projection of future changes in flow and wasteloads from
industries to be served;
f) Measures to reduce flow and wastes (if anv);
Explanation:
4. Future without the project.
Explanation:
Purpose and Need
The Facilities Plan/'EID shall include a complete discussion and
demonstration of the need for wastewater treatment in the facilities
planning area, with particular e nphasis on existing public health or
.vater q ulity problems and their severity and extent.
Explanation: _
Develop and Evaluate Alternatives
The a.'ialvsi^ ? 'ould nilude:
a) Effects of interceptor location on land use within and
between urban areas, particularly where land is undeveloped;
b) Effects of alternates on stream flow in the regions;
<:) Limitation of expansion in future due to unavailability of
land;
d) Differences in reliability, operation, and maintenance of
facilities; and
^ Environmental and economic costs of delavs to achieve a
sol j : ion.
Include a mao of existing facilities.
Explanation: _
H-5
-------
A I N/A
Evaluation of Alternatives
The Facilities Plan/EID shall include a comparative analysis of the "no
action" alternative, feasible options, and a systematic development
of wastewater treatment alternatives. The alternatives, including the
Mno action" alternative, shall be screened with respect to capital and
operating costs; significant primary and secondary environmental
effects; physical, legal, or institutional constraints; and compliance
with regulatory requirements. Special attention should be given to
long-term impacts, irreversible impacts, and induced growth. The
reasons for rejecting any alternatives shall be presented, in addition
to any significant environmental benefits precluded by rejection of an
alternative. The analysis should consider the following:
1. Cost of Project:
a) Capital;
b) Operating;
c) Use charges (annual);
d) Initial charges (first year); and
e) Hook-up charges;
Explanation:
2. Design:
a) Flow and waste reduction measures, including infiltration/
inflow reduction:
b) Appropriate .vater conservation measures;
c) Alternative locations, capacities, and construction phasing
of facilities:
d) Alternative waste management techniques, including treat-
ment and discharge, .vastewater reuse, and land application;
e) Alternative methods for utilization of sludge and other
residual materials, including process options and final utili-
zation options;
f) Improving effluent quality through more efficient operation
and maintenance;
g) Appropriate energy reduction measures;
h) Recreation/open space opportunities;
Exolana tion:
3. Primary Impacts (construction impacts):
a) Floodplains;*
b) Wetlands:11
c) Coastal zones;*
d) Agricultural lands;*
e) Parklands;*
f) Historic archaeological sites;*
g) Scenic/recreational sites;* ^-6
-------
h) Endangered species habitat;*
i) Wild, scenic, and recreational rivers;*
j) Structural modification of bodies of water;*
'<) Unique areas;
1) Noise;
m) Air quality;
n) Groundwater quality and quantity;
o) Surface water quality and quantity;
p) Aquifer recharge areas;
q) Population relocation;
r) Conflict with existing residential land use;
s) Other;
"Requires consultation
Explanation:
4. Operational Impact:
a) Aquatic ecosystems (including wetlands);
b) Energy demands;
e) Air quality;
d) System failure;
e) Surface and groundwater quality;
effluent disposal
- sludge disposal
sole source aquifer
f) Surface and groundwater quantity;
- depletion
- diversion
basin transfer
Explanation:
5. Secondary Impacts
The EID should present a clear, concise analysis of the induced
impacts of the project by evaluating (at a minimum) the following:
A. Population projections as they relate to the environmental
constraints, including:
a) Wetlands;11
b) Floodplains:*
c) Steep slopes:
d) Agricultural lands;*
e) Coastal zones;*
f) Parklands;*
g) Aquifer recharge;
h) Endangered species habitat;*
i) Wild, scenic and recreational rivers;*
j) Other sensitive areas unique to the studv area;
!<) Water supply;
1) Air quality: H-7
m) Noise;
*Reauires consultation
-------
A I N/A
B. Consistency with existing and projected land use.
Explanation:
C. Availability of local services:
Explanation:
a) Solid Araste (handling and disposal);
b) Water supply;
c) Transportation;
d) Education;
e) Police, fire, and hospital;
Other.
Explanation:
D. Are grant conditions needed to protect wetlands and flood-
plains?
Explanation:
Other
In addition to the items discussed above, EPA may require that other
analyses and data, which are needed to comply with NEPA, be
included with the Facilities Plan. Such requirements should be dis-
cussed during pre-planning conferences or mid-course review meet-
ings. The EPA also may require submission of supplementary
information before a Step 3 grant is awarded, if it is determined that
it is needed for N'EPA compliance.
Explanation:
H-8
-------
Sources of Information Used for Documentation/Consultation
1. Local and regional land use planning agencies for assesments of
land use trends and population projections especially those
affecting size, timing, and location of facilities, and planning
activities funded under section 701 of the Housing and Com-
munity Development Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-383).
Explanation:
2. The HUD regional office and state offices fif a project involves
a flood hazard area is identified under the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234).
Explanation:
3. The Department of Commerce and the State coastal zone
management agency, if a coastal zone is affected. (Only
applies to "approved" CZM plan.)
Explanation:
4. The Secretary of the Interior or Secretary of Commerce, if a
threatened or endangered species is affected.
Explanation:
5. The Fish and Wildlife Service (Department of the Interior), the
Department of Commerce, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
and the Environmental Protection Agency, Section 404, if a
wetland is affected.
Explanation:
6. The Soil Conservation and Cooperative Extension Service for
the identification of prime agricultural lands.
Explanation:
Applicable
or
Not Applicable
A N/A
H-9
-------
Applicable
or
7. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, National Register of Not Applicable
Historic Places, and the State Historic Preservation Officer for
projects involving cultural resources. ^ N/A
Explanation:
8. Consult with appropriate state offices and the Secretary of the
Interior, or where national forest lands are involved, the
Secretary of Agriculture during the environmental review to
determine the status of an affected river and the probable
impact of the action on eligible rivers designated as wild,
scenic, or recreational.
Explanation: _
9. For control or structural modification of bodies of water, if an
action proposed by the EPA will result in the control or
structural modification of any stream or other body of water
for any purpose, including navigation and drainage, the respons-
ible official (reviewer) shall consult with the:
Department of the Interior;
Department of Commerce;
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the
NYSDEC, Division of Fish and Wildlife.
The purpose of this consultation will be the conservation of fish and
wildlife resources. This consultation shall follow the procedures in
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and shall occur during the
environmental review of an action.
Explanation:
H-10
-------
APPENDIX I
-------
APPENDIX I
SUGGESTIONS FOR PREPARING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS/PUBLIC
ANNOUNCEMENTS/CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS
-------
APPENDIX I
SUGGESTIONS FOR PREPARING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS/PUBLIC
ANNOUNCEMENTS/CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS
Think about your audience. Who will be reading the document and
what are their points of view?:
1. EPA decision-makers who are reading the EA to understand the
project and decide whether or not it can be approved without
a federal EIS.
2. If EPA issues the FNSI/EA, it will be read by other fed-
eral/state agencies, as well as environmental groups (and,
sometimes, project opponents). This audience may know very
little about the project initially, but will be checking to
see whether their area of concern has been satisfactorily
addressed.
Begin drafting the EA early in the review process, not at the
last hour. Fill in with new information as it becomes available.
Use clear, concise language throughout public documents.
Provide a succinct description of the area(s) to be affected by
the alternatives under consideration.
Provide short, concise descriptions, no longer than necessary to
understand the effects of the alternatives. Verbose descriptions
do not improve the adequacy of the EA.
Concentrate effort and attention on important issues.
Follow standard format of EA (Appendix Bl).
Citations should be fully referenced and documented.
Data and analysis presented should be commensurate to the import-
ance of the impact. The less important material should be
summarized, consolidated or simply referenced.
Figures should be used to show the location of the planned
facility.
One figure should show the location of the facility relative
to surrounding areas and key local landmarks.
Another figure should show the facility site, itself.
1-1
-------
Map Requisites:
Legible;
No larger than 8i"xll" (remember, the EA has to be
reproduced and distributed to 50-100, or more, interested
parties);
North arrow;
Scale;
Legend;
Label roads and landmarks;
If a place is named in the text, it should appear on the
figure.
Present data in tabular and graphic form when possible.
A good figure, map or graph can save thousands of words of
descriptive text.
Remember, the reader probably knows very little about the project
and has not seen the project area before.
Reminder, attach mailing labels for sending the document to
anyone not on EPA's standard mailing list. If unsure, call EPA!
1-2
-------
APPENDIX J
-------
APPENDIX J
CRITERIA FOR STRUCTURING A STATE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
-------
CRITERIA FOR
STRUCTURING A STATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS [SERP]
For Title VI State Revolving Fund [SRF] Loan Projects
General.
Title VI of the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act [CWA] requires that
some SRF activities be implemented "in the same manner as Title IIM. Since Title
II projects are specifically subject to review under the National Environmental
Policy Act [NEPA], a review process similar to that which occurs on Title II
projects is a statutory requirement for Title VI projects. Nearly all States
have extensive experience in preparing preliminary environmental assessments
under full delegation of the Title II program. Under Title VI, States not only
will be responsible for producing preliminary environmental impact assessments,
as under Title II delegation, but also will have full responsibility for final
review and decision-making activities (e.g., 40 CFR §6.514 activities) for which
EPA is legally responsible under Title II. States, therefore, will also be
responsible for identifying, funding, undertaking and final decision-making for
all levels of environmental impact assessment analysis, including the more exten-
sive full-scale environmental impact statements which are directly funded and
undertaken by EPA under Title II. EPA's environmental review involvement under
the Title VI program will be limited to initially approving the proposed State
process, with annual oversight and some technical assistance thereafter.
In preparation for taking on these additional responsibilities, and making
the entire Title VI environmental impact assessment process a State process,
States will submit documentation on their existing or proposed NEPA-1 ike process
for EPA review and approval as a part of their SRF grant application. This
documentation should address how the existing or proposed State process meets
the statutory criterion as being implementable "in the same manner as Title
II." EPA will provide pre-application assistance to States in establishing
an approvable State environmental impact assessment process [hereinafter refered
to as a State Environmental Review Process or SERP].
Administratively, EPA will examine existing or proposed SERPs using the
NEPA objectives outlined in the elements below as a guide. When approved,
State procedures will apply to all §212 POWT construction projects funded under
Title VI as identified in required SRF Intended Use Plan and Annual Report
submittals.
An approvable process for conducting environmental Impact assessments on
Title VI construction projects may range from adoption of the 40 CFR Part 6
(Subpart E and related subparts) process in its entirety, to adoption with
proposed modifications incorporating existing State procedures or a clearly
different process which addresses itself to the elements discussed below. The
terminology used in the following discussion is taken from 40 CFR Part 6, but
States may employ different terminology. Once a SERP is approved, any signif-
icant changes made to the process in the future must also be approved by EPA.
It should be noted, however, that EPA's NEPA requirements will continue to
be applicable to Title II projects. In situations where a community will be a
recipient of both Title II and Title VI assistance, the Title VI portions must
J-l
-------
be incorporated within the Title II analyses in compliance with the "cumulative
effects" criterion embedded in the 40 CFR Part 6 process.
Element 1. Legal foundation and administrative processes establishing a
structured NEPA-like process.
A State must provide evidence of the legal foundation (legislation, regula-
tions, executive orders, etc.) which establishes the State's authority to review
public works projects, such as projects contemplated under the SRF program, for
impacts on the human and natural environment similar in intent and scope to the
steps described in 40 CFR Part 6, sections 506 and 508 through 511. The sub-
missions must specify:
0 the agency (Department, Division) of government that will be vested
with the primary responsibility for conducting environmental reviews and eval-
uations of SRF projects (e.g., an existing agency conducting environmental
analyses in conjunction with a State's long range planning activity);
0 the extent to which any responsibilities for environmental review will
be delegated to local applicants which will build the projects, and how an
"independent" review and oversight by the primary State reviewing agency will
be achieved;
0 the follow-up mechanisms to be used to ensure compliance with mitigatior
measures required to make a project environmentally acceptable; and
0 the legal remedies available to the public to challenge environmental
review determinations and enforcement. States which elect to implement a SERP
through purely administrative means must have a State statute equivalent to
the (Federal) Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, as amended (60 Stat. 237)
under which legal challenges can be made.
Element 2. Inter-disciplinary approach to assessing impacts including adherence
to other Federal and State environmental objectives.
Responsiveness to a number of Federal and State cross-cutting environmental
concerns, such as impacts on endangered species or coastal barriers, in relation
to a proposed project is integral to a SERP. The scope of the Federal environ-
mental concerns and objectives is identified in EPA's procedures implementing
NEPA at Subpart C, 40 CFR Part 6, or as modified by final SRF guidance. As a
part of its SERP, the State should have the inter-disciplinary expertise for
identifying these concerns, evaluating and interpreting them, and for evaluating
preferred alternatives which avoid, minimize or mitigate undesirable project
impacts.
In addressing these Federal cross-cutting environmental concerns, States
may rely on State laws, executive orders and/or regulations which identify lead
State agencies having (or that will acquire) the inter-disciplinary expertise
to carry out the responsibilities similar to those discussed in Subpart C of 40
CFR Part 6.
J-2
-------
Where a State has no law, executive order and/or regulation covering a
specific Subpart C objective, States may supplement their own mechanisms and/or
inter-disciplinary expertise on an interim basis by adopting the coordination
requirements with Federal agencies contained in Subpart C, 40 CFR Part 6. In
doing so, States may also adopt the appropriate coordination procedures con-
tained in environmental review manuals prepared by EPA regions, or as otherwise
developed under earlier State/EPA agreements. In this situation, States have
the option to coordinate directly with lead Federal agencies identified in
Subpart C, or utilize existing Federal clearinghouses at the State level. As
a State establishes its own mechanisms and/or inter-disciplinary expertise in
the future, these can be substituted for Federal agency coordination procedures.
Element 3. Documentation of preliminary and final determinations.
Decisions resulting from inter-disciplinary, multi-environmental objec-
tive assessment approach require formal documentation of the information, pro-
cesses and premises which influenced the decision. Documentation should be
maintained to substantiate the lack of, as well as the existence of, impacts
associated with a proposed project. Experience with EPA's environmental review
process has est?bl i V.-.ed five distinct determinations that can be made on a
project — three of which are mutually exclusive:
— a determination to categorically exclude a project from an environmental
review (see criteria at 40 CFR 6.505);
-- a determination resulting in a finding of no significant impact [FNSI]
(see criteria at 40 CFR 6.506(c) and 508) following documentation in
an environmental assessment [EA] (see criteria at 40 CFR 6.506(a) and
(b)); and
-- a determination to proceed, or not to proceed, in a record of decision
[ROD] (see criteria at 40 CFR 6.511), following a full environmental
impact statement [EIS] (see criteria at 40 CFR 6.506(c), 510 and 511);
and two which are overlapping:
-- a determination to partition a larger, complex, environmental review
(see criteria at 40 CFR 6.507); and
-- a determination to reaffirm, or change, a previous CE, FNSI or EIS
decision following a manditory five year environmental re-ev'aluation of
a proposed project (see criteria at 40 CFR 6.505(d), 508(b) and 511(c)).
Of these five, only determinations involving a FNSI, ROD or reaffirmation
of a previous decision are required for an approvable SERP. Determinations
involving categorical exclusions and partitioning are optional. However in the
absence of processes for these two types of determinations, full environmental
reviews will have to be conducted on all projects.
State established processes for these determinations may have other names,
and additional steps, not traditionally associated with EPA's environmental
review process.
J-3
-------
Element 4. Public outreach and participation in decision-making.
Public outreach and participation activities include the manner in which
the affected public and other interested parties are notified of proposed pro-
jects, the extent to which they have access to documentation, opportunities to
comment on alternatives, and steps for redress of adverse decisions.
The SERP process must provide notices similar to the 40 CFR Part 6 process
(e.g., publication in a local newspaper and/or distribution to a project mail-
ing list) when:
- a CE is issued or rescinded;
- after a FNSI is issued but before it becomes effective; and
- following reaffirmation of a decision issued five years earlier.
For initiation of an EIS, this notice requirement may be satisfied by
publication of a notice of intent to prepare an EIS in a State legal periodical
or by using other establirhed State legal notification processes.
A single public hearing, as a minimum, will be required for all projects
except for those which qualify for exemption from environmental review require-
ments .
A formal public comment period should be provided for all public notices,
(other than for CE projects and reafirming previous determinations) during
which no action on a project is allowed. In cases where a State proposes
review periods less than those enumerated in 40 CFR Part 6, the State submittal
should discuss their rationale but in no case should these periods be less than
established by State statute for similar State public works activities.
Element 5. Alternatives generation and evaluation.
The State's evaluation criteria and processes must allow for comparative
evaluations among alternatives including both the beneficial and adverse con-
sequences on the existing environment, the future environment and on individual
sensitive environmental issues that have been identified in advance by project
management or, when initiating an EIS, scoped in advance with the assistance of
public participation. These criteria and processes must also allow for devising
appropriate near-term and long-range measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate
adverse impacts (see 40 CFR 6.506 and 509 to 511). Furthermore, coordination
with other municipal public works projects should be considered during the
alternative generation and evaluation stages, including enhancing public recre-
ation and open space opportunities.
Alternatives generation and evaluation procedures should include the follow
ing factors (see 40 CFR 6.506 and 509 to 511):
° a no action alternative;
0 direct and indirect impacts of the entire municipal wastewater treatment
system(s) on all other related environmental objectives;
0 existing and future environmental conditions, including all other
environmental objectives, affected by the entire system(s); and
0 land-use and other social parameters affected by the entire system(s).
J-4
-------
Element 6. Other environmental review principles.
Acceptable SERPs should incorporate the following environmental review
princi pies.
(a) Continuation of the practice of describing the purpose and need for
facilities based on population projections techniques associated with the Title
II program is encouraged, and must be used for communities which receive both
Title II and Title VI assistance. In all other cases where the technique to
project future populations is based on unique State models, the results of such
projections should be corroborated, within reasonable bounds, by a nationally
recognized model such as one produced by the Federal Census Bureau, and must
be compatible with population projections used in State Implementation Plans
developed under the Clean Air Act.
(b) Cumulative impacts must be evaluated within the context of complete
municipal wastewater treatment systems, as well as other public works projects
and future community growth (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) within
the study area.
For communities which are receiving project assistance for the first time,
especially when the project is for less than a complete system, the environmen-
tal review must be based on the impacts resulting from the entire system. This
means that an environmental review study area should be delineated in a manner
which generally encompasses the complete service area of the final system
envisioned to be in place at the planning horizon, and outlying areas that may
directly or indirectly be impacted by the completed system.
In situations involving improvements to be built as separate projects at
different times, the environmental review associated with the first project
must consider the anticipated cumulative impacts from later projects as well.
When later projects are begun, the environmental review need only address
changes to the anticipated impacts within the entire study area due to chang-
es in facility plan design/engineering changes, or to changes in the physical
environment that had occurred in the interim period.
By adoption of this principle, environmental review evaluations will
largely satisfy the three factors listed in element 5 above.
Element 7. Reporting information to EPA.
States shall establish administrative procedures for monitoring, collec-
ing and summarizing environmental review information. The annual report will
show show that all necessary funded projects received an environmental review
under the approved SERP. The annual evaluation will review a sample of projects
to verify application and adequacy of SERPs.
J-5
-------
APPENDIX K
ABBREVIATIONS USED
-------
APPENDIX K
ABBREVIATIONS:
ACHP
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
BA
Biological Assessment
BO
Biological Opinion
CBPA
Coastal Barrier Resource Act of 1962
CE
Categorical Exclusion
CEQ
Council on Environmental Quality
CIA
Community Impact Analysis
COE
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CWA
Clean Water Act
CZMA
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
EA
Environmental Assessment
EIP
Environmental Impacts Branch
EID
Environmental Information Document
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
FDPA
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FNSI
Finding of No Significant Impact
FWCA
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958
FWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
MOA
Memorandum of Agreement
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NF.PA
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NESHAPS
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant
Sources
NFIA
National Floud Insurance Act of 1968
NHPA
National Historic Preservation Act
NHL
National Historic Landmarks
NMFS
National Marine Fisheries Service
NNL
National Natural Landmarks
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPS
National Park Service
NSPS
New Source Performance Standards
R&HA
River and Harbor Act of 18S9
ROD
Record of Decision
scs
Soil Conservation Service
SDWA
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974
SERP
State Environmental Review Process
SHPO
State Historic Preservation Officer
SIP
State Implementation Plan
SPDES
State Pollution Discharge Elimination System
SRF
State Revolving Fund
SSA
Sole Source Aquifer
TPDES
Territorial Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
USDA
U.S. Department of Agriculture
WRC
Water Resources Council
K-l
------- |