Department of the Interior

Departmental Manual

 

Effective Date:  5/27/04

Series:    Environmental Quality Programs

Part 516: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Statements

 

Originating Office: Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance

516 DM 4

 

4.1     Purpose.  This Chapter provides supplementary instructions for implement­ing those portions of the CEQ regulations pertaining to EIS.

 

4.2     Statutory Requirements (40 CFR 1502.3).  NEPA requires that an EIS be prepared by the responsible Federal official.  This official is normally the lowest-level official who has overall responsibility for formulating, reviewing, or proposing an action or, alternatively, has been delegated the authority or responsibility to develop, approve, or adopt a proposal or action.  Preparation at this level will ensure that the NEPA process will be incorporated into the planning process and that the EIS will accompany the proposal through existing review processes.

 

4.3     Timing (40 CFR 1502.5).

 

          A.      For such actions as broad programmatic decisions, rulemakings, or resource management plans, an EIS should be commenced whenever a proposed action has been defined.  These types of actions can be inherently vague and difficult to analyze until the proposed action is defined.  At that point, concurrent drafting of the proposal and its accompanying EIS should be commenced.

 

          B.      The feasibility analysis (go/no-go) stage, at which time an EIS is to be prepared for proposed projects undertaken by DOI, is to be interpreted as the stage prior to the first point of major commitment to the proposal.  For example, this would normally be at the authori­zation stage for proposals requiring Congressional authorization; the location or corridor stage for transportation, transmission, and communication projects; and the leasing stage for offshore mineral resources proposals [40 CFR 1502.5(a)].

 

          C.      For situations involving applications to DOI or the bureaus, an EIS need not be commenced until an application is essentially complete; i.e., any required environmental information is submitted and any required advance funding is paid by the applicant [40 CFR 1502.5(b)].  Officials shall also inform applicants of any responsibility they will bear for funding environmental analyses associated with their proposals.

 

4.4     Page Limits (40 CFR 1502.7).  Bureaus will ensure that the length of EISs is no greater than necessary to comply with NEPA, the CEQ regulations, and this Chapter.

 

4.5     Supplemental Statements (40 CFR 1502.9).

 

          A.      Supplements are required if an agency makes substantial changes in the proposed action relevant to environmental concerns or there are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts.

 

          B.      A bureau and/or the appropriate program Assistant Secretary will consult with the OEPC and the Office of the Solicitor prior to proposing to CEQ to prepare a supplemental statement using alternative arrangements such as issuing a final supplement without pre­paring an intervening draft.

 

          C.      If, after a decision has been made based on a final EIS, a described proposal is further defined or modified and if its changed effects are not significant and still within the scope of the earlier EIS, an EA, and a FONSI may be prepared for subsequent decisions rather than a supplement.

 

4.6     Format (40 CFR 1502.10).

 

          A.      Proposed departures from the standard format described in the CEQ regulations and this Chapter must be approved by the OEPC.

 

          B.      The section listing the preparers of the EIS will also include other sources of information, including a bibliography or list of cited references, when appropriate.

 

          C.      The section listing the distribution of the EIS will also fully des­cribe the consultation and public involvement processes used in planning the proposal and in preparing the EIS, if this information is not discussed elsewhere in the document.  The section will also describe the level to which the public contributed usable data for the document.

 

          D.      If CEQ's standard format is not used or if the EIS is combined with another planning or decision making document, the section which analyzes and compares the environmental consequences of the proposal and its alternatives will be clearly and separately identified and not interwoven into other portions of or spread throughout the document.

 

4.7     Cover Sheet (40 CFR 1502.11).  The cover sheet will also indicate whether the EIS is intended to serve any other environmental review or consultation requirements pursuant to Section 1502.25.  The cover sheet will also identify cooperating agencies, the location of the action, and whether the analysis is programmatic in nature.

 

4.8     Summary (40 CFR 1502.12).  The emphasis in the summary should be on those considerations, controversies, and issues that significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

 

4.9     Purpose and Need (40 CFR 1502.13).  This section shall present the purpose of and need for the agency action.  The purpose and need shall be described in sufficient detail to aid in the development of an appropriate range of alternatives.  Care should be taken to ensure an objective presentation and not a justification.

 

4.10   Alternatives Including the Proposed Action (40 CFR 1502.14).

 

          A.      The following terms are commonly used in NEPA compliance activities and are described below for clarification.

 

                   (1)     Range of Alternatives - This term means all reasonable alternatives that will be rigorously explored and objectively evaluated as well as other alternatives that are eliminated from detailed study after providing reasons for their elimination.

 

                   (2)     Reasonable Alternatives - This term means alternatives that are technically and economically practical or feasible and that meet the purpose and need of the proposed action.

 

                   (3)     Proposed Action - This term means the agency activity to be undertaken.  It also means a non-Federal entity’s planned activity which falls under a Federal agency’s authority to issue permits, licenses, grants, rights-of-way, or other common Federal approvals, funding, or regulatory instruments.  The proposed action is generally the earliest known description of the action to be taken.  The proposed action is not necessarily, but may become, during the NEPA process, a preferred alternative or an environmentally preferred alternative.  The proposed action must be fully and clearly described in order to proceed with NEPA analysis.

 

                   (4)     Preferred Alternative - This term means the alternative which the agency believes would fulfill its statutory mission and responsibilities, while giving consideration to economic, environmental, technical, and other factors.  It may or may not be the same as the agency’s or the non-Federal entity’s proposed action.

 

                   (5)     Environmentally Preferred Alternative - This term means the alternative that will best promote the national environmental policy as expressed in NEPA’s Section 101 and can be characterized as causing the least damage to the biological and physical environment and best protect, preserve, and enhance the nation’s historic, cultural, and natural resources. 

 

                   (6)     No Action Alternative - This term has two interpretations.  First “no action” means “no change” from a current management direction or level of management intensity.  Second “no action” means “no project” in cases where a new project is proposed for construction.  Regardless of the interpretation, the “no action” alternative is required to be analyzed in an EIS.

 

          B.      As a general rule, the following guidance will apply:

 

                   (1)     For internally initiated proposals, i.e., for those cases where the Department conducts or controls the planning process, both the draft and final EIS shall identify the bureau’s proposed action.

 

                   (2)     For externally initiated proposals, i.e., for those cases where the Department is reacting to an application or similar request,

 

                             (a)     the draft and final EIS shall identify the applicant’s proposed action, and

  

                             (b)     the draft EIS should also identify the bureau’s preferred alternative, if one or more exists, and the final EIS should identify the bureau’s preferred alternative unless another law prohibits the expression of a preference.

 

                   (3)     Proposed departures from this guidance must be approved by the OEPC and the Office of the Solicitor. 

 

          C.      Certain mitigation measures can be clearly integral to the proposed action and its alternatives and should be incorporated into and analyzed as a part of the proposal and appropriate alternatives.  When this is done, these measures are no longer considered independently with other mitigation.  Where appropriate, major mitigation measures may be identified and analyzed as separate alternatives where the environmental consequences are distinct and signifi­cant enough to warrant separate evaluation.

 

          D.      In practicing consensus-based management during the development of an EIS, bureaus should give full consideration to any reasonable alternative(s) put forth by participating interested parties.  While there can be no guarantee that a community’s proposed alternative will be taken as the agency proposed action, bureaus must be able to show that a community’s work is reflected in the evaluation of the proposed action and the final decision.  To be considered, the community’s alternative must be fully consistent with NEPA, the CEQ Regulations, this Departmental Manual part, all applicable Departmental and bureau written policies and guidance.

 

4.11   Appendix (40 CFR 1502.18). If an EIS is intended to serve other environmental review or consultation requirements pursuant to Section 1502.25, any more detailed information needed to comply with these requirements may be included as an appendix.

 

4.12   Tiering (40 CFR 1502.20).

 

          A.      Tiering is a tool to prevent repetitive discussions and to focus on issues currently before the decision maker.  In this process, earlier documents from which later documents are tiered, must be reliable and kept current.  Tiered documents must make a finding that conditions described in earlier documents are still in effect or must revise any analyses that are out of date.

 

          B.      In some cases, transferring or combining information from previous NEPA documents can be done to reduce repetitive discussions and duplication of effort (see 4.20, below).

 

          C.      Bureaus must maintain access to such things as: sources of similar information, examples of tiered and transferred analyses, a set of procedural steps to make the most of tiered and transferred analyses, knowledge of when to use previous material, and how to used tiered and transferred analyses without sacrificing references to original sources.

 

4.13   Incorporation by Reference (40 CFR 1502.21).  Citations of specific topics will include the pertinent page numbers.  All literature references will be listed in the bibliography.

 

4.14   Incomplete or Unavailable Information (40 CFR 1502.22).  The references to over­all costs in this section are not limited to market costs, but include other costs to society such as social costs due to delay.

 

4.15   Methodology and Scientific Accuracy (40 CFR 1502.24).  Conclusions about environ­mental effects will be preceded by an analysis that supports that conclusion unless explicit reference by footnote is made to other supporting documentation that is readily available to the public.  Bureaus will also follow Departmental procedures for information quality as required under Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001.

 

4.16   Adaptive Management.  Adaptive management is a system of management practices based on clearly identified outcomes, monitoring to determine if management actions are meeting outcomes, and, if not, facilitating management changes that will best ensure that outcomes are met or to re-evaluate the outcomes.  Adaptive management recognizes that knowledge about natural resource systems is sometimes uncertain and is the preferred method of management in these cases.  Bureaus are encouraged to build adaptive management practice into their proposed actions and NEPA compliance activities and train personnel in this important environmental concept.

 

4.17   Environmental Review and Consultation Requirements (40 CFR 1502.25).

 

          A.      A list of related environmental review and consultation require­ments is available from the OEPC (ESM94-14). 

 

          B.      If the EIS is intended to serve as the vehicle to fully or partially comply with any of these requirements, the associated analyses, studies, or surveys will be identified as such and discussed in the text of the EIS and the cover sheet will so indicate.  Any supporting analyses or reports will be referenced or included as an appendix and shall be sent to reviewing agencies as appropriate in accordance with applicable regulations or procedures.

 

          C.      The draft EIS should list all Federal permits, licenses, or approvals that must be obtained to implement the proposal.  To the fullest extent possible, the environmental analyses for these related permits, licenses, and approvals shall be integrated and performed concurrently.  Although all approvals do not need to be in place to complete the NEPA analysis, they do need to be in place before implementing the proposed action.  Bureaus shall ensure that they have a process in place to make integrated analyses a standard part of their NEPA compliance efforts.

 

4.18   Inviting Comments (40 CFR 1503.1).

 

          A.      Comments from State agencies will be requested through procedures established by the Governor pursuant to Executive Order 12372, and may be requested from local agencies through these procedures to the extent that they include the affected local jurisdictions.

 

          B.      When the proposed action may affect the environment of Indian trust or restricted land or other Indian trust resources, trust assets, or tribal health and safety, comments will be requested from the Indian tribal government unless the Indian tribal government has designated an alternate review process.

 

          C.      The comments of other Departmental bureaus and offices must also be requested.  In order to do this, the preparing bureau must furnish copies of the environmental document to the other bureaus in quantities sufficient to allow simultaneous review.  Bureaus may be removed from this circulation following consultation with, and concurrence of, a bureau.

 

4.19   Response to Comments (40 CFR 1503.4).

 

          A.      Preparation of a final EIS need not be delayed in those cases where a Federal agency, external to DOI and from which comments are required to be obtained [40 CFR 1503.1(a)(1)], does not comment within the prescribed time period. 

 

          B.      Informal attempts will be made to determine the status of any late comments and a reasonable attempt should be made to include the comments and a response in the final EIS.  As noted in 516 DM 2.2D, the late introduction of new issues and alternatives is to be avoided and they will be considered only to the extent practicable.

 

          C.      For those EISs requiring the approval of the AS/PMB pursuant to 516 DM 6.3, bureaus will consult with the OEPC when they propose to prepare an abbreviated final EIS [40 CFR 1503.4(c)].

 

4.20   Elimination of Duplication with State and Local Procedures (40 CFR 1506.2).  Bureaus will incorporate in their appropriate program regulations provisions for the preparation of an EIS by a State agency to the extent authorized in Section 102(2)(D) of NEPA.  Eligible programs are listed in Appendix 1 to this Chapter.

 

4.21   Combining Documents (40 CFR 1506.4).  See 516 DM 4.6D.

 

4.22   Departmental Responsibility (40 CFR 1506.5).

 

          A.      Bureaus are responsible for preparation of their environmental documents and independent evaluation of environmental documents prepared by others for a bureau.

 

          B.      A contractor may be used to prepare any environmental document in accordance with the standards of 40 CFR 1506.5(c).

 

4.23   Public Involvement (40 CFR 1506.6). See 516 DM 1.2, 1.3, 1.6, and 301 DM 2.

 

4.24   Further Guidance (40 CFR 1506.7).  The OEPC may provide further guidance concerning NEPA pursuant to its organizational responsibilities (112 DM 4) and through supplemental directives (381 DM 4.5B).  Current guidance is located in the Environmental Memoranda Series periodically updated by OEPC and available on the OEPC website at http://www.doi.gov/oepc.

 

4.25   Proposals for Legislation (40 CFR 1506.8).  The Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs, in consultation with the OEPC, shall:

 

          A.      Identify in the annual submittal to OMB of the Department’s proposed legislative program any requirements for, and the status of, any environ­mental documents.

 

          B.      When required, ensure that a legislative EIS is included as a part of the formal transmittal of a legislative proposal to the Congress.

 

4.26   Time Periods (40 CFR 1506.10).

 

          A.      The minimum review period for a draft EIS will be forty-five (45) days from the date of publication by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the notice of availability.

 

          B.      For those ElSs requiring the approval of the AS/PMB pursuant to 516 DM 6.3, the OEPC will be responsible for consulting with the EPA and/or CEQ about any proposed reductions in time periods or any extensions of time periods proposed by the bureaus.

 

4.27   Emergencies (40 CFR 1506.11).  See subpart 5.8.

 

 

APPENDIX 1

 

Programs of Grants to States and/or Tribes in Which Agencies Having Statewide Jurisdiction May Prepare EISs

 

1.1     Fish and Wildlife Service.

 

          A.      Anadromous Fish Conservation (11.405).

 

          B.      Fish Restoration (15.605).

 

          C.      Wildlife Restoration (15.611).

 

          D.      Endangered Species Conservation (15.615).

         

1.2     National Park Service.

 

          A.      Historic Preservation Grants-in-Aid (15.904).

 

          B.      Outdoor Recreation-Acquisition Development and Planning (15.916).

 

1.3     Office of Surface Mining.

 

          A.      Regulation of Surface Coal Mining and Surface Effects of Underground Coal Mining (15.250).

 

          B.      Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program (15.252).

 

1.4     Office of Insular Affairs.

 

          A.      Economic and Political Development of the Territories and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (15.875).         

 

Note:  Citations in parentheses refer to the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.  Citations are current as of 2003.  The catalog may be viewed at:  http://cfda.gov/.

5/27/04 #3614

Replaces 9/26/84 #3509