Title 32—National Defense--Volume 1
PART 651—ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF ARMY ACTIONS (AR 200-2)
§ 651.1   Purpose.
(a) This part implements the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), setting forth the Army's policies and responsibilities for the early integration of environmental considerations into planning and decision-making.
(b) This part requires environmental analysis of Army actions affecting human health and the environment; providing criteria and guidance on actions normally requiring Environmental Assessments (EAs) or Environmental Impact Statements (EISs), and listing Army actions that are categorically excluded from such requirements, provided specific criteria are met.
(c) This part supplements the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) for Army actions, and must be read in conjunction with them.
(d) All Army acquisition programs must use this part in conjunction with Department of Defense (DOD) 5000.2-R (Mandatory Procedures for Major Defense Acquisition Programs and Major Automated Information Systems).
(e) This part applies to actions of the Active Army and Army Reserve, to functions of the Army National Guard (ARNG) involving federal funding, and to functions for which the Army is the DOD executive agent. It does not apply to Civil Works functions of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or to combat or combat-related activities in a combat or hostile fire zone. Operations Other Than War (OOTW) or Stability and Support Operations (SASO) are subject to the provisions of this part as specified in subpart H of this part. This part applies to relevant actions within the United States, which is defined as all States; the District of Columbia; territories and possessions of the United States; and all waters and airspace subject to the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. The territories and possessions of the United States include the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Wake Island, Midway Island, Guam, Palmyra Island, Johnston Atoll, Navassa Island, and Kingman Reef. This regulation also applies to actions in the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Marianas, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia and Palau (Republic of Belau). In addition, this part addresses the responsibility of the Army for the assessment and consideration of environmental effects for peacetime SASO operations worldwide. Throughout this part, emphasis is placed upon quality analysis of environmental effects, not the production of documents. Documentation is necessary to present and staff results of the analyses, but the objective of NEPA and Army NEPA policy is quality analysis in support of the Army decision maker. The term “analysis” also includes any required documentation to support the analysis, coordinate NEPA requirements, and inform the public and the decision maker.
§ 651.2   References.
Required and related publications and referenced forms are listed in Appendix A of this part.
§ 651.3   Explanation of abbreviations and terms.
Abbreviations and special terms used in this part are explained in the glossary in Appendix F of this part.
§ 651.4   Responsibilities.
(a) The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations and Environment) (ASA(I&E)). ASA(I&E) is designated by the Secretary of the Army (SA) as the Army's responsible official for NEPA policy, guidance, and oversight. In meeting these responsibilities, ASA(I&E) will:
(1) Maintain liaison with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Congressional oversight committees, and other federal, state, and local agencies on Army environmental policies.
(2) Review NEPA training at all levels of the Army, including curricula at Army, DOD, other service, other agency, and private institutions; and ensure adequacy of NEPA training of Army personnel at all levels.
(3) Establish an Army library for EAs and EISs, which will serve as:
(i) A means to ascertain adherence to the policies set forth in this part, as well as potential process improvements; and
(ii) A technical resource for proponents and preparers of NEPA documentation.
(b) The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology) (ASA(AL&T)). ASA(AL&T) will:
(1) Under oversight of the ASA(I&E), execute those NEPA policy provisions contained herein that pertain to the ASA(AL&T) responsibilities in the Army materiel development process, as described in Army Regulation (AR) 70-1, Army Acquisition Policy.
(2) Prepare policy for the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) to develop and administer a process of review and approval of environmental analyses during the Army materiel development process.
(3) Prepare research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) and procurement budget justifications to support Materiel Developer (MATDEV) implementation of NEPA provisions.
(c) The Army Acquisition Executive (AEE). The AAE will, under the Army oversight responsibilities assigned to ASA(I&E):
(1) Administer a process to:
(i) Execute all those NEPA policy provisions contained herein that pertain to all acquisition category (ACAT) programs, projects, and products;
(ii) Ensure that Milestone Decision Authorities (MDAs), at all levels, assess the effectiveness of environmental analysis in all phases of the system acquisition process, including legal review of these requirements;
(iii) Establish resource requirements and program, plan, and budget exhibits for inclusion in annual budget decisions;
(iv) Review and approve NEPA documentation at appropriate times during materiel development, in conjunction with acquisition phases and milestone reviews as established in the Acquisition Strategy; and
(v) Establish NEPA responsibility and awareness training requirements for Army Acquisition Corps personnel.
(2) Ensure Program Executive Officers (PEOs), Deputies for Systems Acquisition (DSAs), and direct-reporting Program Managers (PMs) will:
(i) Supervise assigned programs, projects, and products to ensure that each environmental analysis addresses all applicable environmental laws, executive orders, and regulations.
(ii) Ensure that environmental considerations are integrated into system acquisition plans/strategies, Test and Evaluation Master Plans (TEMPs) and Materiel Fielding Plans, Demilitarization/Disposal Plans, system engineering reviews/Integrated Process Team (IPT) processes, and Overarching Integrated Process Team (OIPT) milestone review processes.
(iii) Coordinate environmental analysis with appropriate organizations to include environmental offices such as Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention Support Office (AAPPSO) and U.S. Army Environmental Center (USAEC) and operational offices and organizations such as testers (developmental/operational), producers, users, and disposal offices.
(3) Ensure Program, Project, Product Managers, and other MATDEVs will:
(i) Initiate the environmental analysis process prescribed herein upon receiving the project office charter to commence the materiel development process, and designate a NEPA point of contact (POC) to the Director of Environmental Programs (DEP).
(ii) Integrate the system's environmental analysis (including NEPA) into the system acquisition strategy, milestone review planning, system engineering, and preliminary design, critical design, and production readiness reviews.
(iii) Apply policies and procedures set forth in this part to programs and actions within their organizational and staff responsibility.
(iv) Coordinate with installation managers and incorporate comments and positions of others (such as the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management (ACSIM) and environmental offices of the development or operational testers, producers, users, and disposers) into the decision-making process.
(v) Initiate the analysis of environmental considerations, assess the environmental consequences of proposed programs and projects, and undergo environmental analysis, as appropriate.
(vi) Maintain the administrative record of the program's environmental analysis in accordance with this part.
(vii) Coordinate with local citizens and other affected parties, and incorporate appropriate comments into NEPA analyses.
(viii) Coordinate with ASA(I&E) when NEPA analyses for actions under AAE purview require publication in the Federal Register (FR).
(d) The Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans (DCSOPS). DCSOPS is the proponent for Training and Operations activities. DCSOPS will ensure that Major Army Commands (MACOMs) support and/or perform, as appropriate, NEPA analysis of fielding issues related to specific local or regional concerns when reviewing Materiel Fielding Plans prepared by Combat Developers (CBTDEVs) or MATDEVs. This duty will include the coordination of CBTDEV and MATDEV information with appropriate MACOMs and Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics (DCSLOG).
(e) The Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management (ACSIM). ACSIM is responsible for coordinating, monitoring, and evaluating NEPA activities within the Army. The Environmental Programs Directorate is the Army Staff (ARSTAF) POC for environmental matters and serves as the Army staff advocate for the Army NEPA requirements contained in this part. The ACSIM will:
(1) Encourage environmental responsibility and awareness among Army personnel to most effectively implement the spirit of NEPA.
(2) Establish and maintain the capability (personnel and other resources) to comply with the requirements of this part. This responsibility includes the provision of an adequately trained and educated staff to ensure adherence to the policies and procedures specified by this part.
(f) The Director of Environmental Programs. The director, with support of the U.S. Army Environmental Center, and under the ACSIM, will:
(1) Advise Army agencies in the preparation of NEPA analyses, upon request.
(2) Review, as requested, NEPA analyses submitted by the Army, other DOD components, and other federal agencies.
(3) Monitor proposed Army policy and program documents that have environmental implications to determine compliance with NEPA requirements and ensure integration of environmental considerations into decision-making and adaptive management processes.
(4) Propose and develop Army NEPA guidance pursuant to policies formulated by ASA(I&E).
(5) Advise project proponents regarding support and defense of Army NEPA requirements through the budgeting process.
(6) Provide NEPA process oversight, in support of ASA(I&E), and, as appropriate, technical review of NEPA documentation.
(7) Oversee proponent implementation and execution of NEPA requirements, and develop and execute programs and initiatives to address problem areas.
(8) Assist the ASA(I&E) in the evaluation of formal requests for the delegation of NEPA responsibilities on a case-by-case basis. This assistance will include:
(i) Determination of technical sufficiency of the description of proposed action and alternatives (DOPAA) when submitted as part of the formal delegation request (§ 651.7).
(ii) Coordination of the action with the MACOM requesting the delegation.
(9) Periodically provide ASA(I&E) with a summary analysis and recommendations on needed improvements in policy and guidance to Army activities concerning NEPA implementation, in support of ASA(I&E) oversight responsibilities.
(10) Advise headquarters proponents on how to secure funding and develop programmatic NEPA analyses to address actions that are Army-wide, where a programmatic approach would be appropriate to address the action.
(11) Designate a NEPA PM to coordinate the Army NEPA program and notify ASA(I&E) of the designation.
(12) Maintain manuals and guidance for NEPA analyses for major Army programs in hard copy and make this guidance available on the World Wide Web (WWW) and other electronic means.
(13) Maintain a record of NEPA POCs in the Army, as provided by the MACOMs and other Army agencies.
(14) Forward electronic copies of all EAs, and EISs to AEC to ensure inclusion in the Army NEPA library; and ensure those same documents are forwarded to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).
(g) Heads of Headquarters, Army agencies. The heads of headquarters, Army agencies will:
(1) Apply policies and procedures herein to programs and actions within their staff responsibility except for state-funded operations of the Army National Guard (ARNG).
(2) Task the appropriate component with preparation of NEPA analyses and documentation.
(3) Initiate the preparation of necessary NEPA analyses, assess proposed programs and projects to determine their environmental consequences, and initiate NEPA documentation for circulation and review along with other planning or decision-making documents. These other documents include, as appropriate, completed DD Form 1391 (Military Construction Project Data), Case Study and Justification Folders, Acquisition Strategies, and other documents proposing or supporting proposed programs or projects.
(4) Coordinate appropriate NEPA analyses with ARSTAF agencies.
(5) Designate, record, and report to the DEP the identity of the agency's single POC for NEPA considerations.
(6) Assist in the review of NEPA documentation prepared by DOD and other Army or federal agencies, as requested.
(7) Coordinate proposed directives, instructions, regulations, and major policy publications that have environmental implications with the DEP.
(8) Maintain the capability (personnel and other resources) to comply with the requirements of this part and include provisions for NEPA requirements through the Program Planning and Budget Execution System (PPBES) process.
(h) The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management (ASA(FM)). ASA(FM) will establish procedures to ensure that NEPA requirements are supported in annual authorization requests.
(i) The Judge Advocate General (TJAG). TJAG will provide legal advice to the Army Staff and assistance in NEPA interpretation, federal implementing regulations, and other applicable legal authority; determine the legal sufficiency for Army NEPA documentation; and interface with the Army General Counsel (GC) and the Department of Justice on NEPA-related litigation.
(j) The Army General Counsel. The Army General Counsel will provide legal advice to the Secretary of the Army on all environmental matters, to include interpretation and compliance with NEPA and federal implementing regulations and other applicable legal authority.
(k) The Surgeon General. The Surgeon General will provide technical expertise and guidance to NEPA proponents in the Army, as requested, in order to assess public health, industrial hygiene, and other health aspects of proposed programs and projects.
(l) The Chief, Public Affairs. The Chief, Public Affairs will:
(1) Provide guidance on issuing public announcements such as Findings of No Significant Impact (FNSIs), Notices of Intent (NOIs), scoping procedures, Notices of Availability (NOAs), and other public involvement activities; and establish Army procedures for issuing/announcing releases in the FR.
(2) Review and coordinate planned announcements on actions of national interest with appropriate ARSTAF elements and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs (OASD(PA)).
(3) Assist in the issuance of appropriate press releases to coincide with the publication of notices in the FR.
(4) Provide assistance to MACOM and installation Public Affairs Officers (PAOs) regarding the development and release of public involvement materials.
(m) The Chief of Legislative Liaison. The Chief of Legislative Liaison will notify Members of Congress of impending proposed actions of national concern or interest. The Chief will:
(1) Provide guidance to proponents at all levels on issuing Congressional notifications on actions of national concern or interest.
(2) Review planned congressional notifications on actions of national concern or interest.
(3) Prior to (and in concert with) the issuance of press releases and publications in the FR, assist in the issuance of congressional notifications on actions of national concern or interest.
(n) Commanders of MACOMs, the Director of the Army National Guard, and the U.S. Army Reserve Commander. Commanders of MACOMs, the Director of the Army National Guard, and the U.S. Army Reserve Commander will:
(1) Monitor proposed actions and programs within their commands to ensure compliance with this part, including mitigation monitoring, utilizing Environmental Compliance Assessment System (ECAS), Installation Status Report (ISR), or other mechanisms.
(2) Task the proponent of the proposed action with funding and preparation of NEPA documentation and involvement of the public.
(3) Ensure that any proponent at the MACOM level initiates the required environmental analysis early in the planning process, plans the preparation of necessary NEPA documentation, and uses the analysis to aid in the final decision.
(4) Assist in the review of NEPA documentation prepared by DOD and other Army or federal agencies, as requested.
(5) Maintain official record copies of all NEPA documentation for which they are the proponent, and file electronic copies of those EAs, and final EISs with AEC.
(6) Provide coordination with Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) for proposed actions that have either significant impacts requiring an EIS or are of national interest. This process will require defining the purpose and need for the action, alternatives to be considered, and other information, as requested by HQDA. It also must occur early in the process and prior to an irretrievable commitment of resources that will prejudice the ultimate decision or selection of alternatives (40 CFR 1506.1). When delegated signature authority by HQDA, this process also includes the responsibility for complying with this part and associated Army environmental policy.
(7) Approve and forward NEPA documentation, as appropriate, for actions under their purview.
(8) In the case of the Director, ARNG, or his designee, approve all federal NEPA documentation prepared by all ARNG activities.
(9) Ensure environmental information received from MATDEVs is provided to appropriate field sites to support site-specific environmental analysis and NEPA requirements.
(10) Designate a NEPA PM to coordinate the MACOM NEPA program and maintain quality control of NEPA analyses and documentation that are processed through the command.
(11) Budget for resources to maintain oversight of NEPA and this part.
(o) Installation Commanders; Commanders of U.S. Army Reserve Support Commands; and The Adjutant Generals of the Army National Guard. Installation Commanders; Commanders of U.S. Army Reserve Support Commands; and The Adjutant Generals of the Army National Guard will:
(1) Establish an installation (command organization) NEPA program and evaluate its performance through the Environmental Quality Control Committee (EQCC) as required by AR 200-1, Environmental Protection and Enhancement.
(2) Designate a NEPA POC to coordinate and manage the installation's (command organization's) NEPA program, integrating it into all activities and programs at the installation. The installation commander will notify the MACOM of the designation.
(3) Establish a process that ensures coordination with the MACOM, other installation staff elements (to include PAOs and tenants) and others to incorporate NEPA requirements early in the planning of projects and activities.
(4) Ensure that actions subject to NEPA are coordinated with appropriate installation organizations responsible for such activities as master planning, natural and cultural resources management, or other installation activities and programs.
(5) Ensure that funding for environmental analysis is prioritized and planned, or otherwise arranged by the proponent, and that preparation of NEPA analyses, including the involvement of the public, is consistent with the requirements of this part.
(6) Approve NEPA analyses for actions under their purview. The Adjutant General will review and endorse documents and forward to the NGB for final approval.
(7) Ensure the proponent initiates the NEPA analysis of environmental consequences and assesses the environmental consequences of proposed programs and projects early in the planning process.
(8) Assist in the review of NEPA analyses affecting the installation or activity, and those prepared by DOD and other Army or federal agencies, as requested.
(9) Provide information through the chain of command on proposed actions of national interest to higher headquarters prior to initiation of NEPA documentation.
(10) Maintain official record copies of all NEPA documentation for which they are the proponent and forward electronic copies of those final EISs and EAs through the MACOM to AEC.
(11) Ensure that the installation proponents initiate required environmental analyses early in the planning process and plan the preparation of necessary NEPA documentation.
(12) Ensure NEPA awareness and/or training is provided for professional staff, installation-level proponents, and document reviewers (for example, master planning, range control, etc.).
(13) Solicit support from MACOMs, CBTDEVs, and MATDEVs, as appropriate, in preparing site-specific environmental analysis.
(14) Ensure that local citizens are aware of and, where appropriate, involved in NEPA analyses, and that public comments are obtained and considered in decisions regarding proposals.
(15) Use environmental impact analyses to determine the best alternatives from an environmental perspective, and to ensure that these determinations are part of the Army decision process.
(p) Environmental Officers. Environmental officers (at the Installation, MACOM, and Army activity level) shall, under the authority of the Installation Commander; Commanders of U.S. Army Reserves Regional Support Commands; and Director NGB-ARE (Installation Commanders):
(1) Represent the Installation, MACOM, or activity Commander on NEPA matters.
(2) Advise the proponent on the selection, preparation, and completion of NEPA analyses and documentation. This approach will include oversight on behalf of the proponent to ensure adequacy and support for the proposed action, including mitigation monitoring.
(3) Develop and publish local guidance and procedures for use by NEPA proponents to ensure that NEPA documentation is procedurally and technically correct. (This includes approval of Records of Environmental Consideration (RECs).)
(4) Identify any additional environmental information needed to support informed Army decision-making.
(5) Budget for resources to maintain oversight with NEPA and this part.
(6) Assist proponents, as necessary, to identify issues, impacts, and possible alternatives and/or mitigations relevant to specific proposed actions.
(7) Assist, as required, in monitoring to ensure that specified mitigation measures in NEPA analyses are accomplished. This monitoring includes assessing the effectiveness of the mitigations.
(8) Ensure completion of agency and community coordination.
(q) Proponents. Proponents at all levels will:
(1) Identify the proposed action, the purpose and need, and reasonable alternatives for accomplishing the action.
(2) Fund and prepare NEPA analyses and documentation for their proposed actions. This responsibility will include negotiation for matrix support and services outside the chain of command when additional expertise is needed to prepare, review, or otherwise support the development and approval of NEPA analyses and documentation. These NEPA costs may be borne by successful contract offerors.
(3) Ensure accuracy and adequacy of NEPA analyses, regardless of the author. This work includes incorporation of comments from appropriate servicing Army environmental and legal staffs.
(4) Ensure adequate opportunities for public review and comment on proposed NEPA actions, in accordance with applicable laws and EOs as discussed in § 651.14 (e). This step includes the incorporation of public and agency input into the decision-making process.
(5) Ensure that NEPA analysis is prepared and staffed sufficiently to comply with the intent and requirements of federal laws and Army policy. These documents will provide enough information to ensure that Army decision makers (at all levels) are informed in the performance of their duties (40 CFR 1501.2, 1505.1). This result requires coordination and resolution of important issues developed during the environmental analysis process, especially when the proposed action may involve significant environmental impacts, and includes the incorporation of comments from an affected installation's environmental office in recommendations made to decision makers.
(6) Adequately fund and implement the decision including all mitigation actions and effectiveness monitoring.
(7) Prepare and maintain the official record copy of all NEPA analyses and documentation for which they are the proponent. This step will include the provision of electronic copies of all EAs, final EISs, and Records of Decision (RODs), through their chain of command, to AEC, and forwarding of those same documents to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) as part of their public distribution procedures. In addition, copies of all EAs and FNSIs (in electronic copy) will be provided to ODEP. A copy of the documentation should be maintained for six years after signature of the FNSI/ROD.
(8) Maintain the administrative record for the environmental analysis performed. The administrative record shall be retained by the proponent for a period of six years after completion of the action, unless the action is controversial or of a nature that warrants keeping it longer. The administrative record includes all documents and information used to make the decision. This administrative record should contain, but is not limited to, the following types of records:
(i) Technical information used to develop the description of the proposed action, purpose and need, and the range of alternatives.
(ii) Studies and inventories of affected environmental baselines.
(iii) Correspondence with regulatory agencies.
(iv) Correspondence with, and comments from, private citizens, Native American tribes, Alaskan Natives, local governments, and other individuals and agencies contacted during public involvement.
(v) Maps used in baseline studies.
(vi) Maps and graphics prepared for use in the analysis.
(vii) Affidavits of publications and transcripts of any public participation.
(viii) Other written records that document the preparation of the NEPA analysis.
(ix) An index or table of contents for the administrative record.
(9) Identify other requirements that can be integrated and coordinated within the NEPA process. After doing so, the proponent should establish a strategy for concurrent, not sequential, compliance; sharing similar data, studies, and analyses; and consolidating opportunities for public participation. Examples of relevant statutory and regulatory processes are given in § 651.14 (e).
(10) Identify and coordinate with public agencies, private organizations, and individuals that may have an interest in or jurisdiction over a resource that might be impacted. Coordination should be accomplished in cooperation with the Installation Environmental Offices in order to maintain contact and continuity with the regulatory and environmental communities. Applicable agencies include, but are not limited to:
(i) State Historic Preservation Officer.
(ii) Tribal Historic Preservation Officer.
(iii) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
(iv) Regional offices of the EPA.
(v) State agencies charged with protection of the environment, natural resources, and fish and wildlife.
(vi) USACE Civil Works regulatory functions, including Clean Water Act, Section 404, permitting and wetland protection.
(vii) National Marine Fisheries Service.
(viii) Local agencies and/or governing bodies.
(ix) Environmental interest groups.
(x) Minority, low-income, and disabled populations.
(xi) Tribal governments.
(xii) Existing advisory groups (for example, Restoration Advisory Boards, Citizens Advisory Commissions, etc.).
(11) Identify and coordinate, in concert with environmental offices, proposed actions and supporting environmental analyses with local and/or regional ecosystem management initiatives such as the Mojave Desert Ecosystem Management Initiative or the Chesapeake Bay Initiative.
(12) Review Army policies, including AR 200-1 (Environmental Protection and Enhancement), AR 200-3 (Natural Resources—Land, Forest, and Wildlife Management), and AR 200-4 (Cultural Resources Management) to ensure that the proposed action is coordinated with appropriate resource managers, operators, and planners, and is consistent with existing Army plans and their supporting NEPA analyses.
(13) Identify potential impacts to (and consult with as appropriate) American Indian, Alaskan Native, or Native Hawaiian lands, resources, or cultures (for example, sacred sites, traditional cultural properties, treaty rights, subsistence hunting or fishing rights, or cultural items subject to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)). All consultation shall be conducted on a Government-to-Government basis in accordance with the Presidential Memorandum on Government-to-Government Relations with Tribal Governments (April 29, 1994) (3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 1007) and AR 200-4 (Cultural Resources Management). Proponents shall consider, as appropriate, executing Memoranda of Agreements (MOAs) with interested Native American groups and tribes to facilitate timely and effective participation in the NEPA process. These agreements should be accomplished in cooperation with Installation Environmental Offices in order to maintain contact and continuity with the regulatory and environmental communities.
(14) Review NEPA documentation that relies upon mitigations that were not accomplished to determine if the NEPA analysis needs to be rewritten or updated. Such an update is required if the unaccomplished mitigation was used to support a FNSI. Additional public notice/involvement must accompany any rewrites.
(r) The Commander, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC). The Commander, TRADOC will:
(1) Ensure that NEPA requirements are understood and options incorporated in the Officer Foundation Standards (OFS).
(2) Integrate environmental considerations into doctrine, training, leader development, organization, materiel, and soldier (DTLOMS) processes.
(3) Include environmental expert representation on all Integrated Concept Teams (ICTs) involved in requirements determinations.
(4) Ensure that TRADOC CBTDEVs retain and transfer any environmental analysis or related data (such as alternatives analysis) to the MATDEV upon approval of a materiel need. This information and data will serve as the basis for the MATDEV's Acquisition Strategy and subsequent NEPA analyses.
(5) Ensure that environmental considerations are incorporated into the Mission Needs Statements (MNSs) and Operational Requirements Documents (ORDs).
§ 651.5   Army policies.
(a) NEPA establishes broad federal policies and goals for the protection of the environment and provides a flexible framework for balancing the need for environmental quality with other essential societal functions, including national defense. The Army is expected to manage those aspects of the environment affected by Army activities; comprehensively integrating environmental policy objectives into planning and decision-making. Meaningful integration of environmental considerations is accomplished by efficiently and effectively informing Army planners and decision makers. The Army will use the flexibility of NEPA to ensure implementation in the most cost-efficient and effective manner. The depth of analyses and length of documents will be proportionate to the nature and scope of the action, the complexity and level of anticipated effects on important environmental resources, and the capacity of Army decisions to influence those effects in a productive, meaningful way from the standpoint of environmental quality.
(b) The Army will actively incorporate environmental considerations into informed decision-making, in a manner consistent with NEPA. Communication, cooperation, and, as appropriate, collaboration between government and extra-government entities is an integral part of the NEPA process. Army proponents, participants, reviewers, and approvers will balance environmental concerns with mission requirements, technical requirements, economic feasibility, and long-term sustainability of Army operations. While carrying out its mission, the Army will also encourage the wise stewardship of natural and cultural resources for future generations. Decision makers will be cognizant of the impacts of their decisions on cultural resources, soils, forests, rangelands, water and air quality, fish and wildlife, and other natural resources under their stewardship, and, as appropriate, in the context of regional ecosystems.
(c) Environmental analyses will reflect appropriate consideration of non-statutory environmental issues identified by federal and DOD orders, directives, and policy guidance. Some examples are in § 651.14 (e). Potential issues will be discussed and critically evaluated during scoping and other public involvement processes.
(d) The Army will continually take steps to ensure that the NEPA program is effective and efficient. Effectiveness of the program will be determined by the degree to which environmental considerations are included on a par with the military mission in project planning and decision-making. Efficiency will be promoted through the following:
(1) Awareness and involvement of the proponent in the NEPA process.
(2) NEPA technical and awareness training, as appropriate, at all decision levels of the Army.
(3) Where appropriate, the use of programmatic analyses and tiering to ensure consideration at the appropriate decision levels, elimination of repetitive discussion, consideration of cumulative effects, and focus on issues that are important and appropriate for discussion at each level.
(4) Use of the scoping and public involvement processes to limit the analysis of issues to those which are of interest to the public and/or important to the decision-making at hand.
(5) Elimination of needless paperwork by focusing documents on the major environmental issues affecting those decisions.
(6) Early integration of the NEPA process into all aspects of Army planning, so as to prevent disruption in the decision-making process; ensuring that NEPA personnel function as team members, supporting the Army planning process and sound Army decision-making. All NEPA analyses will be prepared by an interdisciplinary team.
(7) Partnering or coordinating with agencies, organizations, and individuals whose specialized expertise will improve the NEPA process.
(8) Oversight of the NEPA program to ensure continuous process improvement. NEPA requirements will be integrated into other environmental reporting requirements, such as the ISR.
(9) Clear and concise communication of data, documentation, and information relevant to NEPA analysis and documentation.
(10) Environmental analysis of strategic plans based on:
(i) Scoping thoroughly with agencies, organizations, and the public;
(ii) Setting specific goals for important environmental resources;
(iii) Monitoring of impacts to these resources;
(iv) Reporting of monitoring results to the public; and
(v) Adaptive management of Army operations to stay on course with the strategic plan's specific resource goals.
(11) Responsive staffing through HQDA and the Secretariat. To the extent possible, documents and transmittal packages will be acted upon within 30 calendar days of receipt by each office through which they are staffed. These actions will be approved and transmitted, if the subject material is adequate; or returned with comment in those cases where additional work is required. Cases where these policies are violated should be identified to ASA (I&E) for resolution.
(e) Army leadership and commanders at all levels are required to:
(1) Establish and maintain the capability (personnel and other resources) to ensure adherence to the policies and procedures specified by this part. This should include the use of the PPBES, EPR, and other established resourcing processes. This capability can be provided through the use of a given mechanism or mix of mechanisms (contracts, matrix support, and full-time permanent (FTP) staff), but sufficient FTP staff involvement is required to ensure:
(i) Army cognizance of the analyses and decisions being made; and
(ii) Sufficient institutional knowledge of the NEPA analysis to ensure that Army NEPA responsibilities (pre- and post-decision) are met. Every person preparing, implementing, supervising, and managing projects involving NEPA analysis must be familiar with the requirements of NEPA and the provisions of this part.
(2) Ensure environmental responsibility and awareness among personnel to most effectively implement the spirit of NEPA. All personnel who are engaged in any activity or combination of activities that significantly affect the quality of the human environment will be aware of their NEPA responsibility. Only through alertness, foresight, notification through the chain of command, and training and education will NEPA goals be realized.
(f) The worldwide, transboundary, and long-range character of environmental problems will be recognized, and, where consistent with national security requirements and U.S. foreign policy, appropriate support will be given to initiatives, resolutions, and programs designed to maximize international cooperation in protecting the quality of the world human and natural environment. Consideration of the environment for Army decisions involving activities outside the United States (see § 651.1(e)) will be accomplished pursuant to Executive Order 12114 (Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, 4 January 1979), host country final governing standards, DOD Directive (DODD) 6050.7 (Environmental Effects Abroad of Major DOD Actions), DOD Instructions (DODIs), and the requirements of this part. An environmental planning and evaluation process will be incorporated into Army actions that may substantially affect the global commons, environments of other nations, or any protected natural or ecological resources of global importance.
(g) Army NEPA documentation must be periodically reviewed for adequacy and completeness in light of changes in project conditions.
(1) Supplemental NEPA documentation is required when:
(i) The Army makes substantial changes in the proposed action that are relevant to environmental concerns; or
(ii) There are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impact.
(2) This review requires that the proponent merely initiate another “hard look” to ascertain the adequacy of the previous analyses and documentation in light of the conditions listed in paragraph (g)(1) of this section. If this review indicates no need for new or supplemental documentation, a REC can be produced in accordance with this part. Proponents are required to periodically review relevant existing NEPA analyses to ascertain the need for supplemental documentation and document this review in a REC format.
(h) Contractors frequently prepare EISs and EAs. To obtain unbiased analyses, contractors must be selected in a manner avoiding any conflict of interest. Therefore, contractors will execute disclosure statements specifying that they have no financial or other interest in the outcome of the project. The contractor's efforts should be closely monitored throughout the contract to ensure an adequate assessment/statement and also avoid extensive, time-consuming, and costly analyses or revisions. Project proponents and NEPA program managers must be continuously informed and involved.
(i) When appropriate, NEPA analyses will reflect review for operations security principles and procedures, described in AR 530-1 (Operations Security (OPSEC)), on the cover sheet or signature page.
(j) Environmental analyses and associated investigations are advanced project planning, and will be funded from sources other than military construction (MILCON) funds. Operations and Maintenance Army (OMA), Operations and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR), and Operations and Maintenance, Army National Guard (OMANG), RDT&E, or other operating funds are the proper sources of funds for such analysis and documentation. Alternative Environmental Compliance Achievement Program (non-ECAP) funds will be identified for NEPA documentation, monitoring, and other required studies as part of the MILCON approval process.
(k) Costs of design and construction mitigation measures required as a direct result of MILCON projects will be paid from MILCON funds, which will be included in the cost estimate and description of work on DD Form 1391, Military Construction Project Data.
(l) Response actions implemented in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) are not legally subject to NEPA and do not require separate NEPA analysis. As a matter of Army policy, CERCLA and RCRA analysis and documentation should incorporate the values of NEPA and:
(1) Establish the scope of the analysis through full and open public participation;
(2) Analyze all reasonable alternative remedies, evaluating the significance of impacts resulting from the alternatives examined; and
(3) Consider public comments in the selection of the remedy. The decision maker shall ensure that issues involving substantive environmental impacts are addressed by an interdisciplinary team.
(m) MATDEVs, scientists and technologists, and CBTDEVs are responsible for ensuring that their programs comply with NEPA as directed in this part.
(1) Prior to assignment of a MATDEV to plan, execute, and manage a potential acquisition program, CBTDEVs will retain environmental analyses and data from requirements determination activities, and Science and Technology (S&T) organizations will develop and retain data for their technologies. These data will transition to the MATDEV upon assignment to plan, execute, and manage an acquisition program. These data (collected and produced), as well as the decisions made by the CBTDEVs, will serve as a foundation for the environment, safety, and health (ESH) evaluation of the program and the incorporation of program-specific NEPA requirements into the Acquisition Strategy. Programmatic ESH evaluation is considered during the development of the Acquisition Strategy as required by DOD 5000.2-R for all ACAT programs. Programmatic ESH evaluation is not a NEPA document. It is a planning, programming, and budgeting strategy into which the requirements of this part are integrated. Environmental analysis must be a continuous process throughout the materiel development program. During this continuous process, NEPA analysis and documentation may be required to support decision-making prior to any decision that will prejudice the ultimate decision or selection of alternatives (40 CFR 1506.1). In accordance with DOD 5000.2.R, the MATDEV is responsible for environmental analysis of acquisition life-cycle activities (including disposal). Planning to accomplish these responsibilities will be included in the appropriate section of the Acquisition Strategy.
(2) MATDEVs are responsible for the documentation regarding general environmental effects of all aspects of the system (including operation, fielding, and disposal) and the specific effects for all activities for which he/she is the proponent.
(3) MATDEVs will include, in their Acquisition Strategy, provisions for developing and supplementing their NEPA analyses and documentation, and provide data to support supplemental analyses, as required, throughout the life cycle of the system. The MATDEV will coordinate with ASA (AL&T) or MACOM proponent office, ACSIM, and ASA(I&E), identifying NEPA analyses and documentation needed to support milestone decisions. This requirement will be identified in the Acquisition Strategy and the status will be provided to the ACSIM representative prior to milestone review. The Acquisition Strategy will outline the system-specific plans for NEPA compliance, which will be reviewed and approved by the appropriate MDA and ACSIM. Compliance with this plan will be addressed at Milestone Reviews.
(n) AR 700-142 requires that environmental requirements be met to support materiel fielding. During the development of the Materiel Fielding Plan (MFP), and Materiel Fielding Agreement (MFA), the MATDEV and the materiel receiving command will identify environmental information needed to support fielding decisions. The development of generic system environmental and NEPA analyses for the system under evaluation, including military construction requirements and new equipment training issues, will be the responsibility of the MATDEV. The development of site-specific environmental analyses and NEPA documentation (EAs/EISs), using generic system environmental analyses supplied by the MATDEV, will be the responsibility of the receiving Command.
(o) Army proponents are encouraged to draw upon the special expertise available within the Office of the Surgeon General (OSG) (including the U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (USACHPPM)), and USACE District Environmental Staff to identify and evaluate environmental health impacts, and other agencies, such as USAEC, can be used to assess potential environmental impacts). In addition, other special expertise is available in the Army, DOD, other federal agencies, state and local agencies, tribes, and other organizations and individuals. Their participation and assistance is also encouraged.
§ 651.6   NEPA analysis staffing.
(a) NEPA analyses will be prepared by the proponent using appropriate resources (funds and manpower). The proponent, in coordination with the appropriate NEPA program manager, shall determine what proposal requires NEPA analysis, when to initiate NEPA analysis, and what level of NEPA analysis is initially appropriate. The proponent shall remain intimately involved in determining appropriate milestones, timelines, and inputs required for the successful conduct of the NEPA process, including the use of scoping to define the breadth and depth of analysis required. In cases where the document addresses impacts to an environment whose management is not in the proponents' chain of command (for example, installation management of a range for MATDEV testing or installation management of a fielding location), the proponent shall coordinate the analysis and preparation of the document and identify the resources needed for its preparation and staffing through the command structure of that affected activity.
(b) The approving official is responsible for approving NEPA documentation and ensuring completion of the action, including any mitigation actions needed. The approving official may be an installation commander; or, in the case of combat/materiel development, the MATDEV, MDA, or AAE.
(c) Approving officials may select a lead reviewer for NEPA analysis before approving it. The lead reviewer will determine and assemble the personnel needed for the review process. Funding needed to accomplish the review shall be negotiated with the proponent, if required. Lead reviewer may be an installation EC or a NEPA POC designated by an MDA for a combat/materiel development program.
(d) The most important document is the initial NEPA document (draft EA or draft EIS) being processed. Army reviewers are accountable for ensuring thorough early review of draft NEPA analyses. Any organization that raises new concerns or comments during final staffing will explain why issues were not raised earlier. NEPA analyses requiring public release in the FR will be forwarded to ASA(I&E), through the chain of command, for review. This includes all EISs and all EAs that are of national interest or concern. The activities needed to support public release will be coordinated with ASA(I&E). Public release will not proceed without ASA(I&E) approval.
(e) Public release of NEPA analyses in the FR should be limited to EISs, or EAs that are environmentally controversial or of national interest or concern. When analyses address actions affecting numerous sites throughout the Continental United States (CONUS), the proponent will carefully evaluate the need for publishing an NOA in the FR, as this requires an extensive review process, as well as supporting documentation alerting EPA and members of Congress of the action. At a minimum, and depending on the proponent's command structure, the following reviews must be accomplished:
(1) The NEPA analysis must be reviewed by the MACOM Legal Counsel or TJAG, ACSIM, ASA(I&E), and Office of General Counsel (OGC).
(2) The supporting documentation must be reviewed by Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison (OCLL) and Office of the Chief of Public Affairs (OCPA).
(3) Proponents must allow a minimum of 30 days to review the documentation and must allow sufficient time to address comments from these offices prior to publishing the NOA.
(4) The proponent may consider publishing the NOA in local publication resources near each site. Proponents are strongly advised to seek the assistance of the local environmental office and command structure in addressing the need for such notification.
§ 651.7   Delegation of authority for non-acquisition systems.
(a) MACOMs can request delegation authority and responsibility for an EA of national concern or an EIS from ASA(I&E). The proponent, through the appropriate chain of command, and with the concurrence of environmental offices, forwards to HQDA (ODEP) the request to propose, prepare, and finalize an EA and FNSI or EIS through the ROD stage. The request must include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) A description of the purpose and need for the action.
(2) A description of the proposed action and a preliminary list of alternatives to that proposed action, including the “no action” alternative. This constitutes the DOPAA.
(3) An explanation of funding requirements, including cost estimates, and how they will be met.
(4) A brief description of potential issues of concern or controversy, including any issues of potential Army-wide impact.
(5) A plan for scoping and public participation.
(6) A timeline, with milestones for the EIS action.
(b) If granted, a formal letter will be provided by ASA(I&E) outlining extent, conditions, and requirements for the NEPA action. Only the ASA(I&E) can delegate this authority and responsibility. When delegated signature authority by HQDA, the MACOM will be responsible for complying with this part and associated Army environmental policy. This delegation, at the discretion of ASA(I&E), can include specific authority and responsibility for coordination and staffing of:
(1) EAs and FNSIs, and associated transmittal packages, as specified in § 651.35(c).
(2) NOIs, Preliminary Draft EISs (PDEISs), Draft EISs (DEISs), Final EISs (FEISs), RODs and all associated transmittal packages as specified in § 651.45. Such delegation will specify requirements for coordination with ODEP and ASA (I&E).
§ 651.8   Disposition of final documents.
All NEPA documentation and supporting administrative records shall be retained by the proponent's office for a minimum of six years after signature of the FNSI/ROD or the completion of the action, whichever is greater. Copies of EAs, and final EISs will be forwarded to AEC for cataloging and retention in the Army NEPA library. The DEIS and FEIS will be retained until the proposed action and any mitigation program is complete or the information therein is no longer valid. The ACSIM shall forward copies of all FEISs to DTIC, the National Archives, and Records Administration.
§ 651.9   Introduction.
(a) The NEPA process is the systematic examination of possible and probable environmental consequences of implementing a proposed action. Integration of the NEPA process with other Army projects and program planning must occur at the earliest possible time to ensure that:
(1) Planning and decision-making reflect Army environmental values, such as compliance with environmental policy, laws, and regulations; and that these values are evident in Army decisions. In addition, Army decisions must reflect consideration of other requirements such as Executive Orders and other non-statutory requirements, examples of which are enumerated in § 651.14(e).
(2) Army and DOD environmental policies and directives are implemented.
(3) Delays and potential conflicts in the process are minimized. The public should be involved as early as possible to avoid potential delays.
(b) All Army decision-making that may impact the human environment will use a systematic, interdisciplinary approach that ensures the integrated use of the natural and social sciences, planning, and the environmental design arts (section 102(2)(a), Public Law 91-190, 83 Stat. 852, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)). This approach allows timely identification of environmental effects and values in sufficient detail for concurrent evaluation with economic, technical, and mission-related analyses, early in the decision process.
(c) The proponent of an action or project must identify and describe the range of reasonable alternatives to accomplish the purpose and need for the proposed action or project, taking a “hard look” at the magnitude of potential impacts of implementing the reasonable alternatives, and evaluating their significance. To assist in identifying reasonable alternatives, the proponent should consult with the installation environmental office and appropriate federal, tribal, state, and local agencies, and the general public.
§ 651.10   Actions requiring environmental analysis.
The general types of proposed actions requiring environmental impact analysis under NEPA, unless categorically excluded or otherwise included in existing NEPA documentation, include:
(a) Policies, regulations, and procedures (for example, Army and installation regulations).
(b) New management and operational concepts and programs, including logistics; RDT&E; procurement; personnel assignment; real property and facility management (such as master plans); and environmental programs such as Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan (INRMP), Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP), and Integrated Pest Management Plan. NEPA requirements may be incorporated into other Army plans in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.4.
(c) Projects involving facilities construction.
(d) Operations and activities including individual and unit training, flight operations, overall operation of installations, or facility test and evaluation programs.
(e) Actions that require licenses for operations or special material use, including a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license, an Army radiation authorization, or Federal Aviation Administration air space request (new, renewal, or amendment), in accordance with AR 95-50.
(f) Materiel development, operation and support, disposal, and/or modification as required by DOD 5000.2-R.
(g) Transfer of significant equipment or property to the ARNG or Army Reserve.
(h) Research and development including areas such as genetic engineering, laser testing, and electromagnetic pulse generation.
(i) Leases, easements, permits, licenses, or other entitlement for use, to include donation, exchange, barter, or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Examples include grazing leases, grants of easement for highway right-of-way, and requests by the public to use land for special events such as air shows or carnivals.
(j) Federal contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of funding such as Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated (GOCO) industrial plants or housing and construction via third-party contracting.
(k) Request for approval to use or store materials, radiation sources, hazardous and toxic material, or wastes on Army land. If the requester is non-Army, the responsibility to prepare proper environmental documentation may rest with the non-Army requester, who will provide needed information for Army review. The Army must review and adopt all NEPA documentation before approving such requests.
(l) Projects involving chemical weapons/munitions.
§ 651.11   Environmental review categories.
The following are the five broad categories into which a proposed action may fall for environmental review:
(a) Exemption by law. The law must apply to DOD and/or the Army and must prohibit, exempt, or make impossible full compliance with the procedures of NEPA (40 CFR 1506.11). While some aspects of Army decision-making may be exempted from NEPA, other aspects of an action are still subject to NEPA analysis and documentation. The fact that Congress has directed the Army to take an action does not constitute an exemption.
(b) Emergencies. In the event of an emergency, the Army will, as necessary, take immediate actions that have environmental impacts, such as those to promote national defense or security or to protect life or property, without the specific documentation and procedural requirements of other sections of this part. In such cases, at the earliest practicable time, the HQDA proponent will notify the ODEP, which in turn will notify the ASA(I&E). ASA(I&E) will coordinate with the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment (DUSD(IE)) and the CEQ regarding the emergency and subsequent NEPA compliance after the emergency action has been completed. These notifications apply only to actions necessary to control the immediate effects of the emergency. Other actions remain subject to NEPA review (40 CFR 1506.11). A public affairs plan should be developed to ensure open communication among the media, the public, and the installation. The Army will not delay an emergency action necessary for national defense, security, or preservation of human life or property in order to comply with this part or the CEQ regulations. However, the Army's on-site commander dealing with the emergency will consider the probable environmental consequences of proposed actions, and will minimize environmental damage to the maximum degree practicable, consistent with protecting human life, property, and national security. State call-ups of ARNG during a natural disaster or other state emergency are excluded from this notification requirement. After action reports may be required at the discretion of the ASA(I&E).
(c) Categorical Exclusions (CXs). These are categories of actions that normally do not require an EA or an EIS. The Army has determined that they do not individually or cumulatively have a substantial effect on the human environment. Qualification for a CX is further described in subpart D and appendix B of this part. In accordance with § 651.29, actions that degrade the existing environment or are environmentally controversial or adversely affect environmentally sensitive resources will require an EA.
(d) Environmental Assessment. Proposed Army actions not covered in the first three categories (paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section) must be analyzed to determine if they could cause significant impacts to the human or natural environment (see § 651.39). The EA determines whether possible impacts are significant, thereby warranting an EIS. This requires a “hard look” at the magnitude of potential impacts, evaluation of their significance, and documentation in the form of either an NOI to prepare an EIS or a FNSI. The format (§ 651.34) and requirements for this analysis are addressed in subpart E of this part (see § 651.33 for actions normally requiring an EA). The EA is a valuable planning tool to discuss and document environmental impacts, alternatives, and controversial actions, providing public and agency participation, and identifying mitigation measures.
(e) EIS. When an action clearly has significant impacts or when an EA cannot be concluded by a FNSI, an EIS must be prepared. An EIS is initiated by the NOI (§ 651.22), and will examine the significant environmental effects of the proposed action as well as accompanying measures to mitigate those impacts. This process requires formal interaction with the public, a formal “scoping” process, and specified timelines for public review of the documentation and the incorporation of public comments. The format and requirements for the EIS are addressed in subpart F of this part (see § 651.42 for actions normally requiring an EIS).
§ 651.12   Determining appropriate level of NEPA analysis.
(a) The flow chart shown in Figure 1 summarizes the process for determining documentation requirements, as follows:
(1) If the proposed action qualifies as a CX (subpart D of this part), and the screening criteria are met (§ 651.29), the action can proceed. Some CXs require a REC.
(2) If the proposed action is adequately covered within an existing EA or EIS, a REC is prepared to that effect. The REC should state the applicable EA or EIS title and date, and identify where it may be reviewed (§ 651.19, Figure 3). The REC is then attached to the proponent's record copy of that EA or EIS.
(3) If the proposed action is within the general scope of an existing EA or EIS, but requires additional information, a supplement is prepared, considering the new, modified, or missing information. Existing documents are incorporated by reference and conclusions are published as either a FNSI or NOI to supplement the EIS.
(4) If the proposed action is not covered adequately in any existing EA or EIS, or is of a significantly larger scope than that described in the existing document, an EA is prepared, followed by either a FNSI or NOI to prepare an EIS. Initiation of an EIS may proceed without first preparing an EA, if deemed appropriate by the proponent.
(5) If the proposed action is not within the scope of any existing EA or EIS, then the proponent must begin the preparation of a new EA or EIS, as appropriate.
(b) The proponent of a proposed action may adopt appropriate environmental documents (EAs or EISs) prepared by another agency (40 CFR 1500.4(n) and 1506.3). In such cases, the proponent will document their use in a REC FNSI, or ROD.
§ 651.13   Classified actions.
(a) For proposed actions and NEPA analyses involving classified information, AR 380-5 (Department of the Army Information Security Program) will be followed.
(b) Classification does not relieve a proponent of the requirement to assess and document the environmental effects of a proposed action.
(c) When classified information can be reasonably separated from other information and a meaningful environmental analysis produced, unclassified documents will be prepared and processed in accordance with this part. Classified portions will be kept separate and provided to reviewers and decision makers in accordance with AR 380-5.
(d) When classified information is such an integral part of the analysis of a proposal that a meaningful unclassified NEPA analysis cannot be produced, the proponent, in consultation with the appropriate security and environmental offices, will form a team to review classified NEPA analysis. This interdisciplinary team will include environmental professionals to ensure that the consideration of environmental effects will be consistent with the letter and intent of NEPA, including public participation requirements for those aspects which are not classified.
§ 651.14   Integration with Army planning.
(a) Early integration. The Army goal is to concurrently integrate environmental reviews with other Army planning and decision-making actions, thereby avoiding delays in mission accomplishment. To achieve this goal, proponents shall complete NEPA analysis as part of any recommendation or report to decision makers prior to the decision (subject to 40 CFR 1506.1). Early planning (inclusion in Installation Master Plans, INRMPs, ICRMPs, Acquisition Strategies, strategic plans, etc.) will allow efficient program or project execution later in the process.
(1) The planning process will identify issues that are likely to have an effect on the environment, or to be controversial. In most cases, local citizens and/or existing advisory groups should assist in identifying potentially controversial issues during the planning process. The planning process also identifies minor issues that have little or no measurable environmental effect, and it is sound NEPA practice to reduce or eliminate discussion of minor issues to help focus analyses. Such an approach will minimize unnecessary analysis and discussion in the NEPA process and documents.
(2) Decision makers will be informed of and consider the environmental consequences at the same time as other factors such as mission requirements, schedule, and cost. If permits or coordination are required (for example, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act consultation, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), etc.), they should be initiated no later than the scoping phase of the process and should run parallel to the NEPA process, not sequential to it. This practice is in accordance with the recommendations presented in the CEQ publication entitled “The National Environmental Policy Act: A Study of Its Effectiveness After Twenty-five Years.”
(3) NEPA documentation will accompany the proposal through the Army review and decision-making processes. These documents will be forwarded to the planners, designers, and/or implementers, ensuring that the recommendations and mitigations upon which the decision was based are being carried out. The implementation process will provide necessary feedback for adaptive environmental management; responding to inaccuracies or uncertainties in the Army's ability to accurately predict impacts, changing field conditions, or unexpected results from monitoring. The integration of NEPA into the ongoing planning activities of the Army can produce considerable savings to the Army. 1
1 For example, a well-executed EA or EIS on an Installation Master Plan can eliminate the need for many case-by-case analyses and documentation for construction projects. After the approval of an adequate comprehensive plan (which adequately addresses the potential for environmental effects), subsequent projects can tier off of the Master Plan NEPA analysis (AR 210-20). Other integration of the NEPA process and broad-level planning can lead to the “tiering” of NEPA, allowing the proponent to minimize the effort spent on individual projects, and “incorporating by reference” the broader level environmental considerations. This tiering allows the development of program level (programmatic) EAs and EISs, which can introduce greater economies of scale. These assessments are addressed in more detail in paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) Time limits. The timing of the preparation, circulation, submission, and public availability of NEPA documentation is important to ensure that environmental values are integrated into Army planning and decisions.
(1) Categorical exclusions. When a proposed action is categorically excluded from further environmental review (subpart D and appendix B of this part), the proponent may proceed immediately with that action upon receipt of all necessary approvals, (including local environmental office confirmation that the CX applies to the proposal) and the preparation of a REC, if required.
(2) Findings of no significant impact. (i) A proponent will make an EA and draft FNSI available to the public for review and comment for a minimum of 30 days prior to making a final decision and proceeding with an action. If the proposed action is one of national concern, is unprecedented, or normally requires an EIS (§ 651.42), the FNSI must be published in the FR. Otherwise, the FNSI must be published in local newspapers and be made widely available. The FNSI must articulate the deadline for receipt of comments, availability of the EA for review, and steps required to obtain the EA. This can include a POC, address, and phone number; a location; a reference to a website; or some equivalent mechanism. (In no cases will the only coordination mechanism be a website.) At the conclusion of the appropriate comment period, as specified in Figure 2, the decision maker may sign the FNSI and take immediate action, unless sufficient public comments are received to warrant more time for their resolution. Figure 2 follows:
(ii) A news release is required to publicize the availability of the EA and draft FNSI, and a simultaneous announcement that includes publication in the FR must be made by HQDA, if warranted (see § 651.35 (e)). The 30-day waiting period begins at the time that the draft FNSI is publicized (40 CFR 1506.6(b)).
(iii) In cases where the 30-day comment period jeopardizes the project and the full comment period would provide no public benefit, the period may be shortened with appropriate approval by a higher decision authority (such as a MACOM). In no circumstances should the public comment period for an EA/draft FNSI be less than 15 days. A deadline and POC for receipt of comments must be included in the draft FNSI and the news release.
(3) EIS. The EPA publishes a weekly notice in the FR of the EISs filed during the preceding week. This notice usually occurs each Friday. An NOA reaching EPA on a Friday will be published in the following Friday issue of the FR. Failure to deliver an NOA to EPA by close of business on Friday will result in an additional one-week delay. A news release publicizing the action will be made in conjunction with the notice in the FR. The following time periods, calculated from the publication date of the EPA notice, will be observed:
(i) Not less than 45 days for public comment on DEISs (40 CFR 1506.10(c)).
(ii) Not less than 15 days for public availability of DEISs prior to any public hearing on the DEIS (40 CFR 1506(c)(2)).
(iii) Not less than 90 days from filing the DEIS prior to any decision on the proposed action. These periods may run concurrently (40 CFR 1506.10(b) and (c)).
(iv) The time periods prescribed here may be extended or reduced in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.10(b)(2) and (d).
(v) When variations to these time limits are set, the Army agency should consider the factors in 40 CFR 1501.8(b)(1).
(vi) The proponent may also set time limits for other procedures or decisions related to DEISs and FEISs as listed in 40 CFR 1501.8(b)(2).
(vii) Because the entire EIS process could require more than one year (Figure 2 in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section), the process must begin as soon as the project is sufficiently mature to allow analysis of alternatives and the proponent must coordinate with all staff elements with a role to play in the NEPA process. DEIS preparation and response to comments constitute the largest portion of time to prepare an FEIS.
(viii) A public affairs plan should be developed that provides for periodic interaction with the community. There is a minimum public review time of 90 days between the publication of the DEIS and the announcement of the ROD. After the availability of the ROD is announced, the action may proceed. This announcement must be made through the FR for those EISs for which HQDA signs the ROD. For other EISs, announcements in the local press are adequate. Figure 2 in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section indicates typical and required time periods for EISs.
(c) Programmatic environmental review (tiering). (1) Army agencies are encouraged to analyze actions at a programmatic level for those programs that are similar in nature or broad in scope (40 CFR 1502.4(c), 1502.20, and 1508.23). This level of analysis will eliminate repetitive discussions of the same issues and focus on the key issues at each appropriate level of project review. When a broad programmatic EA or EIS has been prepared, any subsequent EIS or EA on an action included within the entire program or policy (particularly a site-specific action) need only summarize issues discussed in the broader statement and concentrate on the issues specific to the subsequent action. 2 This subsequent document will state where the earlier document is available.
2 As an example, an appropriate way to address diverse weapon system deployments would be to produce site-specific EAs or EISs for each major deployment installation, using the generic environmental effects of the weapon system identified in a programmatic EA or EIS prepared by the MATDEV.
(2) Army proponents are normally required to prepare many types of management plans that must include or be accompanied by appropriate NEPA analysis. NEPA analysis for these types of plans can often be accomplished with a programmatic approach, creating an analysis that covers a number of smaller projects or activities. In cases where such activities are adequately assessed as part of these normal planning activities, a REC can be prepared for smaller actions that cite the document in which the activities were previously assessed. Care must be taken to ensure that site-specific or case-specific conditions are adequately addressed in the existing programmatic document before a REC can be used, and the REC must reflect this consideration. If additional analyses are required, they can “tier” off the original analyses, eliminating duplication. Tiering, in this manner, is often applicable to Army actions that are long-term, multi-faceted, or multi-site.
(d) Scoping. (1) When the planning for an Army project or action indicates a need for an EIS, the proponent initiates the scoping process (see subpart G of this part for procedures and actions). This process determines the scope of issues to address in the EIS and identifies the significant issues related to the proposed action. During the scoping, process participants identify the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to consider in the EIS (40 CFR 1508.25). For an individual action, the scope may depend on the relationship of the proposed action to other NEPA documents. The scoping phase of the NEPA process, as part of project planning, will identify aspects of the proposal that are likely to have an effect or be controversial; and will ensure that the NEPA analyses are useful for a decision maker. For example, the early identification and initiation of permit or coordination actions can facilitate problem resolution, and, similarly, cumulative effects can be addressed early in the process and at the appropriate spatial and temporal scales.
(2) The extent of the scoping process, including public involvement, will depend on several factors. These factors include:
(i) The size and type of the proposed action.
(ii) Whether the proposed action is of regional or national interest.
(iii) Degree of any associated environmental controversy.
(iv) Size of the affected environmental parameters.
(v) Significance of any effects on them.
(vi) Extent of prior environmental review.
(vii) Involvement of any substantive time limits.
(viii) Requirements by other laws for environmental review.
(ix) Cumulative impacts.
(3) Through scoping, many future controversies can be eliminated, and public involvement can be used to narrow the scope of the study, concentrating on those aspects of the analysis that are truly important.
(4) The proponent may incorporate scoping as part of the EA process, as well. If the proponent chooses a public involvement strategy, the extent of scoping incorporated is at the proponent's discretion.
(e) Analyses and documentation. Several statutes, regulations, and Executive Orders require analyses, consultation, documentation, and coordination, which duplicate various elements and/or analyses required by NEPA and the CEQ regulations; often leading to confusion, duplication of effort, omission, and, ultimately, unnecessary cost and delay. Therefore, Army proponents are encouraged to identify, early in the NEPA process, opportunities for integrating those requirements into proposed Army programs, policies, and projects. Environmental analyses required by this part will be integrated as much as practicable with other environmental reviews, laws, and Executive Orders (40 CFR 1502.25). Incorporation of these processes must ensure that the individual requirements are met, in addition to those required by NEPA. The NEPA process does not replace the procedural or substantive requirements of other environmental statutes and regulations. Rather, it addresses them in one place so the decision maker has a concise and comprehensive view of the major environmental issues and understands the interrelationships and potential conflicts among the environmental components. NEPA is the “umbrella” that facilitates such coordination by integrating processes that might otherwise proceed independently. Prime candidates for such integration include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Clean Air Act, as amended (General Conformity Rule, 40 CFR parts 51 and 93).
(2) Endangered Species Act.
(3) NHPA, sections 106 and 110.
(4) NAGPRA (Public Law 101-601, 104 Stat. 3048).
(5) Clean Water Act, including Section 404(b)(1).
(6) American Indian Religious Freedom Act.
(7) Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.
(8) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.
(9) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
(10) Pollution Prevention Act.
(11) The Sikes Act, Public Law 86-797, 74 Stat. 1052.
(12) Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements (Executive Order 12856, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 616).
(13) Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (Executive Order 12898, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 859).
(14) Indian Sacred Sites (Executive Order 13007, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 196).
(15) Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (Executive Order 13045, 3 CFR, 1997 Comp., p. 198).
(16) Federal Support of Community Efforts Along American Heritage Rivers (Executive Order 13061, 3 CFR, 1997 Comp., p. 221).
(17) Floodplain Management (Executive Order 11988, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 117).
(18) Protection of Wetlands (Executive Order 11990, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 121).
(19) Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions (Executive Order 12114, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 356).
(20) Invasive Species (Executive Order 13112, 3 CFR, 1999 Comp., p. 159).
(21) AR 200-3, Natural Resources—Land, Forest, and Wildlife Management.
(22) Environmental analysis and documentation required by various state laws.
(23) Any cost-benefit analyses prepared in relation to a proposed action (40 CFR 1502.23).
(24) Any permitting and licensing procedures required by federal and state law.
(25) Any installation and Army master planning functions and plans.
(26) Any installation management plans, particularly those that deal directly with the environment.
(27) Any stationing and installation planning, force development planning, and materiel acquisition planning.
(28) Environmental Noise Management Program.
(29) Hazardous waste management plans.
(30) Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan as required by AR 200-4 and DODD 4700.4, Natural Resources Management Program.
(31) Asbestos Management Plans.
(32) Integrated Natural Resource Management Plans, AR 200-3, Natural Resources—Land, Forest, and Wildlife Management, and DODD 4700.4, Natural Resources Management Program.
(33) Environmental Baseline Surveys.
(34) Programmatic Environment, Safety, and Health Evaluation (PESHE) as required by DOD 5000.2-R and DA Pamphlet 70-3, Army Acquisition Procedures, supporting AR 70-1, Acquisition Policy.
(35) The DOD MOU to Foster the Ecosystem Approach signed by CEQ, and DOD, on 15 December 1995; establishing the importance of “non-listed,” “non-game,” and “non-protected” species.
(36) Other requirements (such as health risk assessments), when efficiencies in the overall Army environmental program will result.
(f) Integration into Army acquisition. The Army acquisition community will integrate environmental analyses into decision-making, as required in this part ensuring that environmental considerations become an integral part of total program planning and budgeting, PEOs, and Program, Product, and Project Managers integrate the NEPA process early, and acquisition planning and decisions reflect national and Army environmental values and considerations. By integrating pollution prevention and other aspects of any environmental analysis early into the materiel acquisition process, the PEO and PM facilitate the identification of environmental cost drivers at a time when they can be most effectively controlled. NEPA program coordinators should refer to DA Pamphlet 70-3, Army Acquisition Procedures, and the Defense Acquisition Deskbook (DAD) for current specific implementation guidance, procedures, and POCs.
(g) Relations with local, state, regional, and tribal agencies. (1) Army installation, agency, or activity environmental officers or planners should establish a continuing relationship with other agencies, including the staffs of adjacent local, state, regional, and tribal governments and agencies. This relationship will promote cooperation and resolution of mutual land use and environment-related problems, and promote the concept of regional ecosystem management as well as general cooperative problem solving. Many of these “partners” will have specialized expertise and access to environmental baseline data, which will assist the Army in day-to-day planning as well as NEPA-related issues. MOUs are encouraged to identify areas of mutual interest, establish POCs, identify lines of communication between agencies, and specify procedures to follow in conflict resolution. Additional coordination is available from state and area-wide planning and development agencies. Through this process, the proponent may gain insights on other agencies' approaches to EAs, surveys, and studies applicable to the current proposal. These other agencies would also be able to assist in identifying possible participants in scoping procedures for projects requiring an EIS.
(2) In some cases, local, state, regional, or tribal governments or agencies will have sufficient jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to reasonable alternatives or significant environmental, social, or economic impacts associated with a proposed action. When appropriate, proponents of an action should determine whether these entities have an interest in becoming a cooperating agency (§ 651.45 (b) and 40 CFR 1501.6). If cooperating agency status is established, a memorandum of agreement is required to document specific expectations, roles, and responsibilities, including analyses to be performed, time schedules, availability of pre-decisional information, and other issues. Cooperating agencies may use their own funds, and the designation of cooperating agency status neither enlarges nor diminishes the decision-making status of any federal or non-federal entities (see CEQ Memorandum for Heads of Federal Agencies entitled “Designation of Non-Federal Agencies to be Cooperating Agencies in Implementing the Procedural Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act” dated 28 July 1999, available from the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), Executive Office of the President of the U.S.). In determining sufficient jurisdiction or expertise, CEQ regulations can be used as guidance.
(h) The Army as a cooperating agency. Often, other agencies take actions that can negatively impact the Army mission. In such cases, the Army may have some special or unique expertise or jurisdiction.
(1) The Army may be a cooperating agency (40 CFR 1501.6) in order to:
(i) Provide information or technical expertise to a lead agency.
(ii) Approve portions of a proposed action.
(iii) Ensure the Army has an opportunity to be involved in an action of another federal agency that will affect the Army.
(iv) Provide review and approval of the portions of EISs and RODs that affect the Army.
(2) Adequacy of an EIS is primarily the responsibility of the lead agency. However, as a cooperating agency with approval authority over portions of a proposal, the Army may adopt an EIS if review concludes the EIS adequately satisfies the Army's comments and suggestions.
(3) If the Army is a major approval authority for the proposed action, the appropriate Army official may sign the ROD prepared by the lead agency, or prepare a separate, more focused ROD. If the Army's approval authority is only a minor aspect of the overall proposal, such as issuing a temporary use permit, the Army need not sign the lead agency's ROD or prepare a separate ROD.
(4) The magnitude of the Army's involvement in the proposal will determine the appropriate level and scope of Army review of NEPA documents. If the Army is a major approval authority or may be severely impacted by the proposal or an alternative, the Army should undertake the same level of review as if it were the lead agency. If the involvement is limited, the review may be substantially less. The lead agency is responsible for overall supervision of the EIS, and the Army will attempt to meet all reasonable time frames imposed by the lead agency.
(5) If an installation (or other Army organization) should become aware of an EIS being prepared by another federal agency in which they may be involved within the discussion of the document, they should notify ASA(I&E) through the chain of command. ASA(I&E) will advise regarding appropriate Army participation as a cooperating agency, which may simply involve local coordination.
§ 651.15   Mitigation and monitoring.
(a) Throughout the environmental analysis process, the proponent will consider mitigation measures to avoid or minimize environmental harm. Mitigation measures include:
(1) Avoiding the impact altogether, by eliminating the action or parts of the action.
(2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
(3) Rectifying the impact; by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the adverse effect on the environment.
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time, by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action.
(5) Compensating for the impact, by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. (Examples and further clarification are presented in appendix C of this part.)
(b) When the analysis proceeds to an EA or EIS, mitigation measures will be clearly assessed and those selected for implementation will be identified in the FNSI or the ROD. The proponent must implement those identified mitigations, because they are commitments made as part of the Army decision. The proponent is responsible for responding to inquiries from the public or other agencies regarding the status of mitigation measures adopted in the NEPA process. The mitigation shall become a line item in the proponent's budget or other funding document, if appropriate, or included in the legal document implementing the action (for example, contracts, leases, or grants). Only those practical mitigation measures that can reasonably be accomplished as part of a proposed alternative will be identified. Any mitigation measures selected by the proponent will be clearly outlined in the NEPA decision document, will be budgeted and funded (or funding arranged) by the proponent, and will be identified, with the appropriate fund code, in the EPR (AR 200-1). Mitigations will be monitored through environmental compliance reporting, such as the ISR (AR 200-1) or the Environmental Quality Report. Mitigation measures are identified and funded in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, or other media area requirements.
(c) Based upon the analysis and selection of mitigation measures that reduce environmental impacts until they are no longer significant, an EA may result in a FNSI. If a proponent uses mitigation measures in such a manner, the FNSI must identify these mitigating measures, and they become legally binding and must be accomplished as the project is implemented. If any of these identified mitigation measures do not occur, so that significant adverse environmental effects could reasonably expected to result, the proponent must publish an NOI and prepare an EIS.
(d) Potential mitigation measures that appear practical, and are unobtainable within expected Army resources, or that some other agency (including non-Army agencies) should perform, will be identified in the NEPA analysis to the maximum extent practicable. A number of factors determine what is practical, including military mission, manpower restrictions, cost, institutional barriers, technical feasibility, and public acceptance. Practicality does not necessarily ensure resolution of conflicts among these items, rather it is the degree of conflict that determines practicality. Although mission conflicts are inevitable, they are not necessarily insurmountable; and the proponent should be cautious about declaring all mitigations impractical and carefully consider any manpower requirements. The key point concerning both the manpower and cost constraints is that, unless money is actually budgeted and manpower assigned, the mitigation does not exist. Coordination by the proponent early in the process will be required to allow ample time to get the mitigation activities into the budget cycle. The project cannot be undertaken until all required mitigation efforts are fully resourced, or until the lack of funding and resultant effects, are fully addressed in the NEPA analysis.
(e) Mitigation measures that were considered but rejected, including those that can be accomplished by other agencies, must be discussed, along with the reason for the rejection, within the EA or EIS. If they occur in an EA, their rejection may lead to an EIS, if the resultant unmitigated impacts are significant.
(f) Proponents may request assistance with mitigation from cooperating non-Army agencies, when appropriate. Such assistance is appropriate when the requested agency was a cooperating agency during preparation of a NEPA document, or has the technology, expertise, time, funds, or familiarity with the project or the local ecology necessary to implement the mitigation measure more effectively than the lead agency.
(g) The proponent agency or other appropriate cooperating agency will implement mitigations and other conditions established in the EA or EIS, or commitments made in the FNSI or ROD. Legal documents implementing the action (such as contracts, permits, grants) will specify mitigation measures to be performed. Penalties against a contractor for noncompliance may also be specified as appropriate. Specification of penalties should be fully coordinated with the appropriate legal advisor.
(h) A monitoring and enforcement program for any mitigation will be adopted and summarized in the NEPA documentation (see appendix C of this part for guidelines on implementing such a program). Whether adoption of a monitoring and enforcement program is applicable (40 CFR 1505.2(c)) and whether the specific adopted action requires monitoring (40 CFR 1505.3) may depend on the following:
(1) A change in environmental conditions or project activities assumed in the EIS (such that original predictions of the extent of adverse environmental impacts may be too limited);
(2) The outcome of the mitigation measure is uncertain (for example, new technology);
(3) Major environmental controversy remains associated with the selected alternative; or
(4) Failure of a mitigation measure, or other unforeseen circumstances, could result in a failure to meet achievement of requirements (such as adverse effects on federal or state listed endangered or threatened species, important historic or archaeological sites that are either listed or eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places, wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, or other public or private protected resources). Proponents must follow local installation environmental office procedures to coordinate with appropriate federal, tribal, state, or local agencies responsible for a particular program to determine what would constitute “adverse effects.”
(i) Monitoring is an integral part of any mitigation system.
(1) Enforcement monitoring ensures that mitigation is being performed as described in the NEPA documentation, mitigation requirements and penalty clauses are written into any contracts, and required provisions are enforced. The development of an enforcement monitoring program is governed by who will actually perform the mitigation: a contractor, a cooperating agency, or an in-house (Army) lead agency. Detailed guidance is contained in Appendix C of this part. The proponent is ultimately responsible for performing any mitigation activities. All monitoring results will be sent to the installation Environmental Office; in the case of the Army Reserves, the Regional Support Commands (RSCs); and, in the case of the National Guard, the NGB.
(2) Effectiveness monitoring measures the success of the mitigation effort and/or the environmental effect. While quantitative measurements are desired, qualitative measures may be required. The objective is to obtain enough information to judge the effect of the mitigation. In establishing the monitoring system, the responsible agent should coordinate the monitoring with the Environmental Office. Specific steps and guidelines are included in appendix C of this part.
(j) The monitoring program, in most cases, should be established well before the action begins, particularly when biological variables are being measured and investigated. At this stage, any necessary contracts, funding, and manpower assignments must be initiated. Technical results from the analysis should be summarized by the proponent and coordinated with the installation Environmental Office. Subsequent coordination with the concerned public and other agencies, as arranged through development of the mitigation plan, will be handled through the Environmental Office.
(k) If the mitigations are effective, the monitoring should be continued as long as the mitigations are needed to address impacts of the initial action. If the mitigations are ineffective, the proponent and the responsible group should re-examine the mitigation measures, in consultation with the Environmental Office and appropriate experts, and resolve the inadequacies of the mitigation or monitoring. Professionals with specialized and recognized expertise in the topic or issue, as well as concerned citizens, are essential to the credibility of this review. If a different program is required, then a new system must be established. If ineffective mitigations are identified which were required to reduce impact below significance levels (§ 651.35 (g)), the proponent may be required to publish an NOI and prepare an EIS (paragraph (c) of this section).
(l) Environmental monitoring report. An environmental monitoring report is prepared at one or more points after program or action execution. Its purpose is to determine the accuracy of impact predictions. It can serve as the basis for adjustments in mitigation programs and to adjust impact predictions in future projects. Further guidance and clarification are included in appendix C of this part.
§ 651.16   Cumulative impacts.
(a) NEPA analyses must assess cumulative effects, which are the impact on the environment resulting from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Actions by federal, non-federal agencies, and private parties must be considered (40 CFR 1508.7).
(b) The scoping process should be used to identify possible cumulative impacts. The proponent should also contact appropriate off-post officials, such as tribal, state, county, or local planning officials, to identify other actions that should be considered in the cumulative effects analysis.
(c) A suggested cumulative effects approach is as follows:
(1) Identify the boundary of each resource category. Boundaries may be geographic or temporal. For example, the Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) might be the appropriate boundary for the air quality analysis, while a watershed could be the boundary for the water quality analysis. Depending upon the circumstances, these boundaries could be different and could extend off the installation.
(2) Describe the threshold level of significance for that resource category. For example, a violation of air quality standards within the AQCR would be an appropriate threshold level.
(3) Determine the environmental consequence of the action. The analysis should identify the cause and effect relationships, determine the magnitude and significance of cumulative effects, and identify possible mitigation measures.
§ 651.17   Environmental justice.
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations, 11 February 1994, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 859) requires the proponent to determine whether the proposed action will have a disproportionate impact on minority or low-income communities, both off-post and on-post.
§ 651.18   Introduction.
NEPA documentation will be prepared and published double-sided on recycled paper. The recycled paper symbol should be presented on the inside of document covers.
§ 651.19   Record of environmental consideration.
A Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) is a signed statement submitted with project documentation that briefly documents that an Army action has received environmental review. RECs are prepared for CXs that require them, and for actions covered by existing or previous NEPA documentation. A REC briefly describes the proposed action and timeframe, identifies the proponent and approving official(s), and clearly shows how an action qualifies for a CX, or is already covered in an existing EA or EIS. When used to support a CX, the REC must address the use of screening criteria to ensure that no extraordinary circumstances or situations exist. A REC has no prescribed format, as long as the above information is included. To reduce paperwork, a REC can reference such documents as real estate Environmental Baseline Studies (EBSs) and other documents, as long as they are readily available for review. While a REC may document compliance with the requirements of NEPA, it does not fulfill the requirements of other environmental laws and regulations. Figure 3 illustrates a possible format for the REC as follows:
§ 651.20   Environmental assessment.
An EA is intended to assist agency planning and decision-making. While required to assess environmental impacts and evaluate their significance, it is routinely used as a planning document to evaluate environmental impacts, develop alternatives and mitigation measures, and allow for agency and public participation. It:
(a) Briefly provides the decision maker with sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether a FNSI or an EIS should be prepared.
(b) Assures compliance with NEPA, if an EIS is not required and a CX is inappropriate.
(c) Facilitates preparation of an EIS, if required.
(d) Includes brief discussions of the need for the proposed action, alternatives to the proposed action (NEPA, section 102(2)(e)), environmental impacts, and a listing of persons and agencies consulted (see subpart E of this part for requirements).
(e) The EA provides the proponent, the public, and the decision maker with sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether environmental impacts of a proposed action are potentially significant. An EA is substantially less rigorous and costly than an EIS, but requires sufficient detail to identify and ascertain the significance of expected impacts associated with the proposed action and its alternatives. The EA can often provide the required “hard look” at the potential environmental effects of an action, program, or policy within 1 to 25 pages, depending upon the nature of the action and project-specific conditions.
§ 651.21   Finding of no significant impact.
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) is a document that briefly states why an action (not otherwise excluded) will not significantly affect the environment, and, therefore, that an EIS will not be prepared. The FNSI includes a summary of the EA and notes any related NEPA documentation. If the EA is attached, the FNSI need not repeat any of the EA discussion, but may incorporate it by reference. The draft FNSI will be made available to the public for review and comment for 30 days prior to the initiation of an action, except in special circumstances when the public comment period is reduced to 15 days, as discussed in § 651.14(b)(2)(iii). Following the comment period and review of public comments, the proponent forwards a decision package that includes a comparison of environmental impacts associated with reasonable alternatives, summary of public concerns, revised FNSI (if necessary), and recommendations for the decision maker. The decision maker reviews the package, makes a decision, and signs the FNSI or the NOI (if the FNSI no longer applies). If a FNSI is signed by the decision maker, the action can proceed immediately.
§ 651.22   Notice of intent.
A Notice of Intent (NOI) is a public notice that an EIS will be prepared. The NOI will briefly:
(a) Describe the proposed and alternative actions.
(b) Describe the proposed scoping process, including when and where any public meetings will be held.
(c) State the name and address of the POC who can answer questions on the proposed action and the EIS (see § 651.45(a) and § 651.49 for application).
§ 651.23   Environmental impact statement.
An Environmental Impact statement (EIS) is a detailed written statement required by NEPA for major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment (42 U.S.C. 4321). A more complete discussion of EIS requirements is presented in subpart F of this part.
§ 651.24   Supplemental EAs and supplemental EISs.
As detailed in § 651.5(g) and in 40 CFR 1502.9(c), proposed actions may require review of existing NEPA documentation. If conditions warrant a supplemental document, these documents are processed in the same way as an original EA or EIS. No new scoping is required for a supplemental EIS filed within one year of the filing of the original ROD. If the review indicates no need for a supplement, that determination will be documented in a REC.
§ 651.25   Notice of availability.
The Notice of Availability (NOA) is published by the Army to inform the public and others that a NEPA document is available for review. A NOA will be published in the FR, coordinating with EPA for draft and final EISs (including supplements), for RODs, and for EAs and FNSIs which are of national concern, are unprecedented, or normally require an EIS. EAs and FNSIs of local concern will be made available in accordance with § 651.36. This agency NOA should not be confused with the EPA's notice of availability of weekly receipts (NWR) 3 of EISs.
3 This notice is published by the EPA and officially begins the public review period. The NWR is published each Friday, and lists the EISs that were filed the previous week.
§ 651.26   Record of decision.
The Record of Decision (ROD) is a concise public document summarizing the findings in the EIS and the basis for the decision. A public ROD is required under the provisions of 40 CFR 1505.2 after completion of an EIS (see § 651.45 (j) for application). The ROD must identify mitigations which were important in supporting decisions, such as those mitigations which reduce otherwise significant impacts, and ensure that appropriate monitoring procedures are implemented (see § 651.15 for application).
§ 651.27   Programmatic NEPA analyses.
These analyses, in the form of an EA or EIS, are useful to examine impacts of actions that are similar in nature or broad in scope. These documents allow the “tiering” of future NEPA documentation in cases where future decisions or unknown future conditions preclude complete NEPA analyses in one step. These documents are discussed further in § 651.14(c).
§ 651.28   Introduction.
Categorical Exclusions (CXs) are categories of actions with no individual or cumulative effect on the human or natural environment, and for which neither an EA nor an EIS is required. The use of a CX is intended to reduce paperwork and eliminate delays in the initiation and completion of proposed actions that have no significant impact.
§ 651.29   Determining when to use a CX (screening criteria).
(a) To use a CX, the proponent must satisfy the following three screening conditions:
(1) The action has not been segmented. Determine that the action has not been segmented to meet the definition of a CX. Segmentation can occur when an action is broken down into small parts in order to avoid the appearance of significance of the total action. An action can be too narrowly defined, minimizing potential impacts in an effort to avoid a higher level of NEPA documentation. The scope of an action must include the consideration of connected, cumulative, and similar actions (see § 651.51(a)).
(2) No exceptional circumstances exist. Determine if the action involves extraordinary circumstances that would preclude the use of a CX (see paragraphs (b) (1) through (14) of this section).
(3) One (or more) CX encompasses the proposed action. Identify a CX (or multiple CXs) that potentially encompasses the proposed action (Appendix B of this part). If no CX is appropriate, and the project is not exempted by statute or emergency provisions, an EA or an EIS must be prepared, before a proposed action may proceed.
(b) Extraordinary circumstances that preclude the use of a CX are:
(1) Reasonable likelihood of significant effects on public health, safety, or the environment.
(2) Reasonable likelihood of significant environmental effects (direct, indirect, and cumulative).
(3) Imposition of uncertain or unique environmental risks.
(4) Greater scope or size than is normal for this category of action.
(5) Reportable releases of hazardous or toxic substances as specified in 40 CFR part 302, Designation, Reportable Quantities, and Notification.
(6) Releases of petroleum, oils, and lubricants (POL) except from a properly functioning engine or vehicle, application of pesticides and herbicides, or where the proposed action results in the requirement to develop or amend a Spill Prevention, Control, or Countermeasures Plan.
(7) When a review of an action that might otherwise qualify for a Record of Non-applicability (RONA) reveals that air emissions exceed de minimis levels or otherwise that a formal Clean Air Act conformity determination is required.
(8) Reasonable likelihood of violating any federal, state, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment.
(9) Unresolved effect on environmentally sensitive resources, as defined in paragraph (c) of this section.
(10) Involving effects on the quality of the environment that are likely to be highly controversial.
(11) Involving effects on the environment that are highly uncertain, involve unique or unknown risks, or are scientifically controversial.
(12) Establishes a precedent (or makes decisions in principle) for future or subsequent actions that are reasonably likely to have a future significant effect.
(13) Potential for degradation of already existing poor environmental conditions. Also, initiation of a degrading influence, activity, or effect in areas not already significantly modified from their natural condition.
(14) Introduction/employment of unproven technology.
(c) If a proposed action would adversely affect “environmentally sensitive” resources, unless the impact has been resolved through another environmental process (e.g., CZMA, NHPA, CWA, etc.) a CX cannot be used (see paragraph (e) of this section). Environmentally sensitive resources include:
(1) Proposed federally listed, threatened, or endangered species or their designated critical habitats.
(2) Properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (AR 200-4).
(3) Areas having special designation or recognition such as prime or unique agricultural lands; coastal zones; designated wilderness or wilderness study areas; wild and scenic rivers; National Historic Landmarks (designated by the Secretary of the Interior); 100-year floodplains; wetlands; sole source aquifers (potential sources of drinking water); National Wildlife Refuges; National Parks; areas of critical environmental concern; or other areas of high environmental sensitivity.
(4) Cultural Resources as defined in AR 200-4.
(d) The use of a CX does not relieve the proponent from compliance with other statutes, such as RCRA, or consultations under the Endangered Species Act or the NHPA. Such consultations may be required to determine the applicability of the CX screening criteria.
(e) For those CXs that require a REC, a brief (one to two sentence) presentation of conclusions reached during screening is required in the REC. This determination can be made using current information and expertise, if available and adequate, or can be derived through conversation, as long as the basis for the determination is included in the REC. Copies of appropriate interagency correspondence can be attached to the REC. Example conclusions regarding screening criteria are as follows:
(1) “USFWS concurred in informal coordination that E/T species will not be affected”.
(2) “Corps of Engineers determined action is covered by nationwide general permit”.
(3) “SHPO concurred with action”.
(4) “State Department of Natural Resources concurred that no effect to state sensitive species is expected”.
§ 651.30   CX actions.
Types of actions that normally qualify for CX are listed in Appendix B of this part.
§ 651.31   Modification of the CX list.
The Army list of CXs is subject to continual review and modification, in consultation with CEQ. Additional modifications can be implemented through submission, through channels, to ASA (I&E) for consideration and consultation. Subordinate Army headquarters may not modify the CX list through supplements to this part. Upon approval, proposed modifications to the list of CXs will be published in the Federal Register, providing an opportunity for public review and comment.
§ 651.32   Introduction.
(a) An EA is intended to facilitate agency planning and informed decision-making, helping proponents and other decision makers understand the potential extent of environmental impacts of a proposed action and its alternatives, and whether those impacts (or cumulative impacts) are significant. The EA can aid in Army compliance with NEPA when no EIS is necessary. An EA will be prepared if a proposed action:
(1) Is not an emergency (§ 651.11(b)).
(2) Is not exempt from (or an exception to) NEPA (§ 651.11(a)).
(3) Does not qualify as a CX (§ 651.11(c)).
(4) Is not adequately covered by existing NEPA analysis and documentation (§ 651.19).
(5) Does not normally require an EIS (§ 651.42).
(b) An EA can be 1 to 25 pages in length and be adequate to meet the requirements of this part, depending upon site-specific circumstances and conditions. Any analysis that exceeds 25 pages in length should be evaluated to consider whether the action and its effects are significant and thus warrant an EIS.
§ 651.33   Actions normally requiring an EA.
The following Army actions normally require an EA, unless they qualify for the use of a CX:
(a) Special field training exercises or test activities in excess of five acres on Army land of a nature or magnitude not within the annual installation training cycle or installation master plan.
(b) Military construction that exceeds five contiguous acres, including contracts for off-post construction.
(c) Changes to established installation land use that generate impacts on the environment.
(d) Alteration projects affecting historically significant structures, archaeological sites, or places listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
(e) Actions that could cause significant increase in soil erosion, or affect prime or unique farmland (off Army property), wetlands, floodplains, coastal zones, wilderness areas, aquifers or other water supplies, prime or unique wildlife habitat, or wild and scenic rivers.
(f) Actions proposed during the life cycle of a weapon system if the action produces a new hazardous or toxic material or results in a new hazardous or toxic waste, and the action is not adequately addressed by existing NEPA documentation. Examples of actions normally requiring an EA during the life cycle include, but are not limited to, testing, production, fielding, and training involving natural resources, and disposal/demilitarization. System design, development, and production actions may require an EA, if such decisions establish precedent (or make decisions, in principle) for future actions with potential environmental effects. Such actions should be carefully considered in cooperation with the development or production contractor or government agency, and NEPA analysis may be required.
(g) Development and approval of installation master plans.
(h) Development and implementation of Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans (INRMPs) (land, forest, fish, and wildlife) and Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plans (ICRMPs).
(i) Actions that take place in, or adversely affect, important wildlife habitats, including wildlife refuges.
(j) Field activities on land not controlled by the military, except those that do not alter land use to substantially change the environment (for example, patrolling activities in a forest). This includes firing of weapons, missiles, or lasers over navigable waters of the United States, or extending 45 meters or more above ground level into the national airspace. It also includes joint air attack training that may require participating aircraft to exceed 250 knots at altitudes below 3000 feet above ground level, and helicopters, at any speed, below 500 feet above ground level.
(k) An action with substantial adverse local or regional effects on energy or water availability. Such impacts can only be adequately identified with input from local agencies and/or citizens.
(l) Production of hazardous or toxic materials.
(m) Changes to established airspace use that generate impacts on the environment or socioeconomic systems, or create a hazard to non-participants.
(n) An installation pesticide, fungicide, herbicide, insecticide, and rodenticide-use program/plan.
(o) Acquisition, construction, or alteration of (or space for) a laboratory that will use hazardous chemicals, drugs, or biological or radioactive materials.
(p) An activity that affects a federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species, a federal candidate species, a species proposed for federal listing, or critical habitat.
(q) Substantial proposed changes in Army-wide doctrine or policy that potentially have an adverse effect on the environment (40 CFR 1508.18 (b)(1)).
(r) An action that may threaten a violation of federal, state, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment.
(s) The construction and operation of major new fixed facilities or the substantial commitment of installation natural resources supporting new materiel at the installation.
§ 651.34   EA components.
EAs should be 1 to 25 pages in length, and will include:
(a) Signature (Review and Approval) page.
(b) Purpose and need for the action.
(c) Description of the proposed action.
(d) Alternatives considered. The alternatives considered, including appropriate consideration of the “No Action” alternative, the “Proposed Action,” and all other appropriate and reasonable alternatives that can be realistically accomplished. In the discussion of alternatives, any criteria for screening alternatives from full consideration should be presented, and the final disposition of any alternatives that were initially identified should be discussed.
(e) Affected environment. This section must address the general conditions and nature of the affected environment and establish the environmental setting against which environmental effects are evaluated. This should include any relevant general baseline conditions focusing on specific aspects of the environment that may be impacted by the alternatives. EBSs and similar real estate or construction environmental baseline documents, or their equivalent, may be incorporated and/or referenced.
(f) Environmental consequences. Environmental consequences of the proposed action and the alternatives. The document must state and assess the effects (direct, indirect, and cumulative) of the proposed action and its alternatives on the environment, and what practical mitigation is available to minimize these impacts. Discussion and comparison of impacts should provide sufficient analysis to reach a conclusion regarding the significance of the impacts, and is not merely a quantification of facts.
(g) Conclusions regarding the impacts of the proposed action. A clear statement will be provided regarding whether or not the described impacts are significant. If the EA identifies potential significant impacts associated with the proposed action, the conclusion should clearly state that an EIS will be prepared before the proposed action is implemented. If no significant impacts are associated with the project, the conclusion should state that a FNSI will be prepared. Any mitigations that reduce adverse impacts must be clearly presented. If the EA depends upon mitigations to support a resultant FNSI, these mitigations must be clearly identified as a subsection of the Conclusions.
(h) Listing of preparers, and agencies and persons consulted. Copies of correspondence to and from agencies and persons contacted during the preparation of the EA will be available in the administrative record and may be included in the EA as appendices. In addition, the list of analysts/preparers will be presented.
(i) References. These provide bibliographic information for cited sources. Draft documents should not be cited as references without the expressed permission of the proponent of the draft material.
§ 651.35   Decision process.
(a) An EA results in either a FNSI or an NOI to prepare an EIS. Initiation of an NOI to prepare an EIS should occur at any time in the decision process when it is determined that significant effects may occur as a result of the proposed action. The proponent should notify the decision maker of any such determination as soon as possible.
(b) The FNSI is a document (40 CFR 1508.13) that briefly states why an action (not otherwise excluded) will not significantly affect the environment, and, therefore, an EIS will not be prepared. It summarizes the EA, noting any NEPA documents that are related to, but are not part of, the scope of the EA under consideration. If the EA is attached, the FNSI may incorporate the EA's discussion by reference. The draft FNSI will be made available to the public for review and comment for 30 days prior to the initiation of an action (see § 651.14(b)(2)(iii) for an exception). Following the comment period, the decision maker signs the FNSI, and the action can proceed. It is important that the final FNSI reflect the decision made, the response to public comments, and the basis for the final decision.
(c) The FNSI must contain the following:
(1) The name of the action.
(2) A brief description of the action (including any alternatives considered).
(3) A short discussion of the anticipated environmental effects.
(4) The facts and conclusions that have led to the FNSI.
(5) A deadline and POC for further information or receipt of public comments (see § 651.47).
(d) The FNSI is normally no more than two typewritten pages in length.
(e) The draft FNSI will be made available to the public prior to initiation of the proposed action, unless it is a classified action (see § 651.13 for security exclusions). Draft FNSIs that have national interest should be submitted with the proposed press release, along with a Questions and Answers (Q&A) package, through command channels to ASA(I&E) for approval and subsequent publication in the FR. Draft FNSIs having national interest will be coordinated with OCPA. Local publication of the FNSI will not precede the FR publication. The text of the publication should be identical to the FR publication.
(f) For actions of only regional or local interest, the draft FNSI will be publicized in accordance with § 651.14(b)(2). Distribution of the draft FNSI should include any agencies, organizations, and individuals that have expressed interest in the project, those who may be affected, and others deemed appropriate.
(g) Some FNSIs will require the implementation of mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts below significance levels, thereby eliminating the requirement for an EIS. In such instances, the following steps must be taken:
(1) The EA must be made readily available to the public for review through traditional publication and distribution, and through the World Wide Web (WWW) or similar technology. This distribution must be planned to ensure that all appropriate entities and stakeholders have easy access to the material. Ensuring this availability may necessitate the distribution of printed information at locations that are readily accessible and frequented by those who are affected or interested.
(2) Any identified mitigations must be tracked to ensure implementation, similar to those specified in an EIS and ROD.
(3) The EA analysis procedures must be sufficiently rigorous to identify and analyze impacts that are individually or cumulatively significant.
(h) The proponent is responsible for funding the preparation, staffing, and distribution of the draft FNSI and EA package, and the incorporation of public/agency review and comment. The proponent shall also ensure appropriate public and agency meetings, which may be required to facilitate the NEPA process in completing the EA. The decision maker will approve and sign the EA and FNSI documents. Proponents will ensure that the EA and FNSI, to include drafts, are provided in electronic format to allow for maximum information flow throughout the process.
(i) The proponent should ensure that the decision maker is continuously informed of key findings during the EA process, particularly with respect to potential impacts and controversy related to the proposed action.
§ 651.36   Public involvement.
(a) The involvement of other agencies, organizations, and individuals in the development of EAs and EISs enhances collaborative issue identification and problem solving. Such involvement demonstrates that the Army is committed to open decision-making and builds the necessary community trust that sustains the Army in the long term. Public involvement is mandatory for EISs (see § 651.47 and Appendix D of this part for information on public involvement requirements).
(b) Environmental agencies and the public will be involved to the extent practicable in the preparation of an EA. If the proponent elects to involve the public in the development of an EA, § 651.47 and Appendix D of this part may be used as guidance. When considering the extent practicable of public interaction (40 CFR 1501.4(b)), factors to be weighed include:
(1) Magnitude of the proposed project/action.
(2) Extent of anticipated public interest, based on experience with similar proposals.
(3) Urgency of the proposal.
(4) National security classification.
(5) The presence of minority or economically-disadvantaged populations.
(c) Public involvement must begin early in the proposal development stage, and during preparation of an EA. The direct involvement of agencies with jurisdiction or special expertise is an integral part of impact analysis, and provides information and conclusions for incorporation into EAs. Unclassified documents incorporated by reference into the EA or FNSI are public documents.
(d) Copies of public notices, “scoping” letters, EAs, draft FNSIs, FNSIs, and other documents routinely sent to the public will be sent directly to appropriate congressional, state, and district offices.
(e) To ensure early incorporation of the public into the process, a plan to include all interested or affected parties should be developed at the beginning of the analysis and documentation process. Open communication with the public is encouraged as a matter of Army policy, and the degree of public involvement varies. Appropriate public notice of the availability of the completed EA/draft FNSI shall be made (see § 651.35) (see also AR 360-5 (Public Information)). The plan will include the following:
(1) Dissemination of information to local and installation communities.
(2) Invitation and incorporation of public comments on Army actions.
(3) Consultation with appropriate persons and agencies.
(f) Further guidance on public participation requirements (to potentially be used for EAs and EISs, depending on circumstances) is presented in Appendix D of this part.
§ 651.37   Public availability.
Documents incorporated into the EA or FNSI by reference will be available for public review. Where possible, use of public libraries and a list of POCs for supportive documents is encouraged. A depository should be chosen which is open beyond normal business hours. To the extent possible, the WWW should also be used to increase public availability of documents.
§ 651.38   Existing environmental assessments.
EAs are dynamic documents. To ensure that the described setting, actions, and effects remain substantially accurate, the proponent or installation Environmental Officer is encouraged to periodically review existing documentation that is still relevant or supporting current action. If an action is not yet completed, substantial changes in the proposed action may require supplementation, as specified in § 651.5 (g).
§ 651.39   Significance.
(a) If the proposed action may or will result in significant impacts to the environment, an EIS is prepared to provide more comprehensive analyses and conclusions about the impacts. Significant impacts of socioeconomic consequence alone do not merit an EIS.
(b) Significance of impacts is determined by examining both the context and intensity of the proposed action (40 CFR 1508.27). The analysis should establish, by resource category, the threshold at which significance is reached. For example, an action that would violate existing pollution standards; cause water, air, noise, soil, or underground pollution; impair visibility for substantial periods; or cause irreparable harm to animal or plant life could be determined significant. Significant beneficial effects also occur and must be addressed, if applicable.
(c) The proponent should use appropriate methods to identify and ascertain the “significance” of impacts. The use of simple analytical tools, which are subject to independent peer review, fully documented, and available to the public, is encouraged. 4 In particular, where impacts are unknown or are suspected to be of public interest, public involvement should be initiated early in the EA (scoping) process.
4 EIFS is one such Army system for evaluating regional economic impacts under NEPA. This system is mandated, as Army policy, for use in NEPA analyses. Other similar tools may be mandated for use in the Army, and will be documented in guidance published pursuant to this part.
§ 651.40   Introduction.
(a) An EIS is a public document designed to ensure that NEPA policies and goals are incorporated early into the programs and actions of federal agencies. An EIS is intended to provide a full, open, and balanced discussion of significant environmental impacts that may result from a proposed action and alternatives, allowing public review and comment on the proposal and providing a basis for informed decision-making.
(b) The NEPA process should support sound, informed, and timely (early) decision-making; not produce encyclopedic documents. CEQ guidance (40 CFR 1502.7) should be followed, establishing a page limit of 150 pages (300 pages for complex projects). To the extent practicable, EISs will “incorporate by reference” any material that is reasonably available for inspection by potentially interested persons within the time allowed for comment. The incorporated material shall be cited in the EIS and its content will be briefly described. Material based on proprietary data, that is itself not available for review and comment, shall not be incorporated by reference.
§ 651.41   Conditions requiring an EIS.
An EIS is required when a proponent, preparer, or approving authority determines that the proposed action has the potential to:
(a) Significantly affect environmental quality, or public health or safety.
(b) Significantly affect historic (listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, maintained by the National Park Service, Department of Interior), or cultural, archaeological, or scientific resources, public parks and recreation areas, wildlife refuge or wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, or aquifers.
(c) Significantly impact prime and unique farmlands located off-post, wetlands, floodplains, coastal zones, or ecologically important areas, or other areas of unique or critical environmental sensitivity.
(d) Result in significant or uncertain environmental effects, or unique or unknown environmental risks.
(e) Significantly affect a federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species, a federal candidate species, a species proposed for federal listing, or critical habitat.
(f) Either establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about a future consideration with significant environmental effects.
(g) Adversely interact with other actions with individually insignificant effects so that cumulatively significant environmental effects result.
(h) Involve the production, storage, transportation, use, treatment, and disposal of hazardous or toxic materials that may have significant environmental impact.
(i) Be highly controversial from an environmental standpoint.
(j) Cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources.
§ 651.42   Actions normally requiring an EIS.
The following actions normally require an EIS:
(a) Significant expansion of a military facility or installation.
(b) Construction of facilities that have a significant effect on wetlands, coastal zones, or other areas of critical environmental concern.
(c) The disposal of nuclear materials, munitions, explosives, industrial and military chemicals, and other hazardous or toxic substances that have the potential to cause significant environmental impact.
(d) Land acquisition, leasing, or other actions that may lead to significant changes in land use.
(e) Realignment or stationing of a brigade or larger table of organization equipment (TOE) unit during peacetime (except where the only significant impacts are socioeconomic, with no significant biophysical environmental impact).
(f) Training exercises conducted outside the boundaries of an existing military reservation where significant environmental damage might occur.
(g) Major changes in the mission or facilities either affecting environmentally sensitive resources (see § 651.29(c)) or causing significant environmental impact (see § 651.39).
§ 651.43   Format of the EIS.
The EIS should not exceed 150 pages in length (300 pages for very complex proposals), and must contain the following (detailed content is discussed in appendix E of this part):
(a) Cover sheet.
(b) Summary.
(c) Table of contents.
(d) Purpose of and need for the action.
(e) Alternatives considered, including proposed action and no-action alternative.
(f) Affected environment (baseline conditions) that may be impacted.
(g) Environmental and socioeconomic consequences.
(h) List of preparers.
(i) Distribution list.
(j) Index.
(k) Appendices (as appropriate).
§ 651.44   Incomplete information.
When the proposed action will have significant adverse effects on the human environment, and there is incomplete or unavailable information, the proponent will ensure that the EIS addresses the issue as follows:
(a) If the incomplete information relevant to reasonably foreseeable significant adverse impacts is essential to a reasoned choice among alternatives and the overall costs of obtaining it are not exorbitant, the Army will include the information in the EIS.
(b) If the information relevant to reasonably foreseeable significant adverse impacts cannot be obtained because the overall costs of obtaining it are exorbitant or the means to obtain it are not known (for example, the means for obtaining it are beyond the state of the art), the proponent will include in the EIS:
(1) A statement that such information is incomplete or unavailable.
(2) A statement of the relevance of the incomplete or unavailable information to evaluating the reasonably foreseeable significant adverse impacts on the human environment.
(3) A summary of existing credible scientific evidence that is relevant to evaluating the reasonably foreseeable significant adverse impacts on the human environment.
(4) An evaluation of such impacts based upon theoretical approaches or research methods generally accepted in the scientific community.
§ 651.45   Steps in preparing and processing an EIS.
(a) NOI. The NOI initiates the formal scoping process and is prepared by the proponent.
(1) Prior to preparing an EIS, an NOI will be published in the FR and in newspapers with appropriate or general circulation in the areas potentially affected by the proposed action. The OCLL will be notified by the ARSTAF proponent of pending EISs so that congressional coordination may be effected. After the NOI is published in the FR, copies of the notice may also be distributed to agencies, organizations, and individuals, as the responsible official deems appropriate.
(2) The NOI transmittal package includes the NOI, the press release, information for Members of Congress, memorandum for correspondents, and a “questions and answers” (Q&A) package. The NOI shall clearly state the proposed action and alternatives, and state why the action may have unknown and/or significant environmental impacts.
(3) The proponent forwards the NOI and the transmittal package to the appropriate HQDA (ARSTAF) proponent for coordination and staffing prior to publication. The ARSTAF proponent will coordinate the NOI with HQDA (ODEP), OCLL, TJAG, OGC, OCPA, relevant MACOMs, and others). Only the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health (DASA(ESOH)) can authorize release of an NOI to the FR for publication, unless that authority has been delegated. A cover letter (similar to Figure 5 in § 651.46) will accompany the NOI. An example NOI is shown in Figure 6 in § 651.46.
(b) Lead and cooperating agency determination. As soon as possible after the decision is made to prepare an EIS, the proponent will contact appropriate federal, tribal, state, and local agencies to identify lead or cooperating agency responsibilities concerning EIS preparation. At this point, a public affairs plan must be developed. In the case of State ARNG actions that have federal funding, the NGB will be the lead agency for the purpose of federal compliance with NEPA. The State may be either a joint lead or a cooperating agency, as determined by NGB.
(c) Scoping. The proponent will begin the scoping process described in § 651.48. Portions of the scoping process may take place prior to publication of the NOI.
(d) DEIS preparation and processing. Prior to publication of a DEIS, the proponent can prepare a PDEIS, allowing for internal organization and the resolution of internal Army consideration, prior to a formal request for comments.
(1) PDEIS. Based on information obtained and decisions made during the scoping process, the proponent may prepare the PDEIS. To expedite headquarters review, a summary document is also required to present the purpose and need for the action, DOPAA, major issues, unresolved issues, major potential controversies, and required mitigations or monitoring. This summary will be forwarded, through the chain of command, to ODEP, the DASA(ESOH), and other interested offices for review and comment. If requested by these offices, a draft PDEIS can be provided following review of the summary. The PDEIS is not normally made available to the public and should be stamped “For Internal Use Only-Deliberative Process.”
(2) DEIS. The Army proponent will advise the DEIS preparer of the number of copies to be forwarded for final HQDA review and those for filing with the EPA. Distribution may include interested congressional delegations and committees, governors, national environmental organizations, the DOD and federal agency headquarters, and other selected entities. The Army proponent will finalize the FR NOA, the proposed news release, and the EPA filing letter for signature of the DASA(ESOH). A revised process summary of the contents (purpose and need for the action, DOPAA, major issues, unresolved issues, major potential controversies, and required mitigations or monitoring) will accompany the DEIS to HQDA for review and comment. If the action has been delegated by the ASA(I&E), only the process summary is required, unless the DEIS is requested by HQDA.
(i) When the DEIS has been formally approved, the preparer can distribute the DEIS to the remainder of the distribution list. The DEIS must be distributed prior to, or simultaneously with, filing with EPA. The list includes federal, state, regional, and local agencies, private citizens, and local organizations. The EPA will publish the NOA in the FR. The 45-day comment period begins on the date of the EPA notice in the FR.
(ii) Following approval, the proponent will forward five copies of the DEIS to EPA for filing and notice in the FR; publication of EPA's NWR commences the public comment period. The proponent will distribute the DEIS prior to, or simultaneously with, filing with EPA. Distribution will include appropriate federal, state, regional, and local agencies; Native American tribes; and organizations and private citizens who have expressed interest in the proposed action.
(iii) For proposed actions that are environmentally controversial, or of national interest, the OCLL shall be notified of the pending action so that appropriate congressional coordination may be effected. The OCPA will coordinate public announcements through its chain of command. Proponents will ensure that the DEIS and subsequent NEPA documents are provided in electronic format to allow for maximum information flow throughout the process.
(e) Public review of DEIS. The DEIS public comment period will be no less than 45 days. If the statement is unusually long, a summary of the DEIS may be circulated, with an attached list of locations where the entire DEIS may be reviewed (for example, local public libraries). Distribution of the complete DEIS should be accompanied by the announcement of availability in established newspapers of major circulation, and must include the following:
(1) Any federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved and any appropriate federal, state, or local agency authorized to develop and enforce environmental standards.
(2) The applicant, if the proposed action involves any application of proposal for the use of Army resources.
(3) Any person, organization, or agency requesting the entire DEIS.
(4) Any Indian tribes, Native Alaskan organizations, or Native Hawaiian organizations potentially impacted by the proposed action.
(5) Chairs/co-chairs of any existing citizen advisory groups (for example, Restoration Advisory Boards).
(f) Public meetings or hearings. Public meetings or hearings on the DEIS will be held in accordance with the criteria established in 40 CFR 1506.6(c) and (d) or for any other reason the proponent deems appropriate. News releases should be prepared and issued to publicize the meetings or hearings at least 15 days prior to the meeting.
(g) Response to comments. Comments will be incorporated in the DEIS by modification of the text and/or written explanation. Where possible, similar comments will be grouped for a common response. The preparer or a higher authority may make individual response, if considered desirable.
(h) The FEIS. If the changes to the DEIS are exclusively clarifications or minor factual corrections, a document consisting of only the DEIS comments, responses to the comments, and errata sheets may be prepared and circulated. If such an abbreviated FEIS is anticipated, the DEIS should contain a statement advising reviewers to keep the document so they will have a complete set of “final” documents. The final EIS to be filed with EPA will consist of a complete document containing a new cover sheet, the errata sheets, comments and responses, and the text of the draft EIS. Coordination, approval, filing, and public notice of an abbreviated FEIS are the same as for a draft DEIS. If extensive modifications are warranted, the proponent will prepare a new, complete FEIS. Preparation, coordination, approval, filing, and public notice of the FEIS are the same as the process outlined for the DEIS. The FEIS distribution must include any person, organization, or agency that submitted substantive comments on the DEIS. One copy (electronic) of the FEIS will be forwarded to ODEP. The FEIS will clearly identify the Army's preferred alternative unless prohibited by law.
(i) Decision. No decision will be made on a proposed action until 30 days after EPA has published the NWR of the FEIS in the FR, or 90 days after the NWR of the DEIS, whichever is later. EPA publishes NWRs weekly. Those NWRs ready for EPA by close of business Friday are published in the next Friday's issue of the FR.
(j) ROD. The ROD documents the decision made and the basis for that decision.
(1) The proponent will prepare a ROD for the decision maker's signature, which will:
(i) Clearly state the decision by describing it in sufficient detail to address the significant issues and ensure necessary long-term monitoring and execution.
(ii) Identify all alternatives considered by the Army in reaching its decision, specifying the environmentally preferred alternative(s). The Army will discuss preferences among alternatives based on relevant factors including environmental, economic, and technical considerations and agency statutory missions.
(iii) Identify and discuss all such factors, including any essential considerations of national policy that were balanced by the Army in making its decision. Because economic and technical analyses are balanced with environmental analysis, the agency preferred alternative will not necessarily be the environmentally preferred alternative.
(iv) Discuss how those considerations entered into the final decision.
(v) State whether all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the selected alternative have been adopted, and if not, why they were not.
(vi) Identify or incorporate by reference the mitigation measures that were incorporated into the decision.
(2) Implementation of the decision may begin immediately after approval of the ROD.
(3) The proponent will prepare an NOA to be published in the FR by the HQDA proponent, following congressional notification. Processing and approval of the NOA is the same as for an NOI.
(4) RODs will be distributed to agencies with authority or oversight over aspects of the proposal, cooperating agencies, appropriate congressional, state, and district offices, all parties that are directly affected, and others upon request.
(5) One electronic copy of the ROD will be forwarded to ODEP.
(6) A monitoring and enforcement program will be adopted and summarized for any mitigation (see Appendix C of this part).
(k) Pre-decision referrals. 40 CFR part 1504 specifies procedures to resolve federal agency disagreements on the environmental effects of a proposed action. Pre-decision referrals apply to interagency disagreement on a proposed action's potential unsatisfactory effects.
(l) Changes during preparation. If there are substantial changes in the proposed action, or significant new information relevant to environmental concerns during the proposed action's planning process, the proponent will prepare revisions or a supplement to any environmental document or prepare new documentation as necessary.
(m) Mitigation. All measures planned to minimize or mitigate expected significant environmental impacts will be identified in the EIS and the ROD. Implementation of the mitigation plan is the responsibility of the proponent (see Appendix C of this part). The proponent will make available to the public, upon request, the status and results of mitigation measures associated with the proposed action. For weapon system acquisition programs, the proponent will coordinate with the appropriate responsible parties before identifying potential mitigations in the EIS/ROD.
(n) Implementing the decision. The proponent will provide for monitoring to assure that decisions are carried out, particularly in controversial cases or environmentally sensitive areas (Appendix C of this part). Mitigation and other conditions that have been identified in the EIS, or during its review and comment period, and made part of the decision (and ROD), will be implemented by the lead agency or other appropriate consenting agency. The proponent will:
(1) Include appropriate conditions in grants, permits, or other approvals.
(2) Ensure that the proponent's project budget includes provisions for mitigations.
(3) Upon request, inform cooperating or commenting agencies on the progress in carrying out adopted mitigation measures that they have proposed and that were adopted by the agency making the decision.
(4) Upon request, make the results of relevant monitoring available to the public and Congress.
(5) Make results of relevant monitoring available to citizens advisory groups, and others that expressed such interest during the EIS process.
§ 651.46   Existing EISs.
A newly proposed action must be the subject of a separate EIS. The proponent may extract and revise the existing environmental documents in such a way as to bring them completely up to date, in light of the new proposals. Such a revised EIS will be prepared and processed entirely under the provisions of this part. If an EIS of another agency is adopted, it must be processed in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.3. Figures 4 through 8 to Subpart F of part 651 follow:
§ 651.47   Public involvement.
(a) As a matter of Army policy, public involvement is required for all EISs, and is strongly encouraged for all Army actions, including EAs. The requirement (40 CFR 1506.6) for public involvement recognizes that all potentially interested or affected parties will be involved, when practicable, whenever analyzing environmental considerations. This requirement can be met at the very beginning of the process by developing a plan to include all affected parties and implementing the plan with appropriate adjustments as it proceeds (AR 360-5). The plan will include the following:
(1) Information dissemination to local and installation communities through such means as news releases to local media, announcements to local citizens groups, and Commander's letters at each phase or milestone (more frequently if needed) of the project. The dissemination of this information will be based on the needs and desires of the local communities.
(2) Each phase or milestone (more frequently if needed) of the project will be coordinated with representatives of local, state, tribal, and federal government agencies.
(3) Public comments will be invited and two-way communication channels will be kept open through various means as stated above. These two-way channels will be dynamic in nature, and should be updated regularly to reflect the needs of the local community.
(4) Public affairs officers at all levels will be kept informed.
(b) When an EIS is being prepared, public involvement is a requisite element of the scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(1)).
(c) Proponents will invite public involvement in the review and comment of EAs and draft FNSIs (40 CFR 1506.6).
(d) Persons and agencies to be consulted include the following:
(1) Municipal, township, and county elected and appointed officials.
(2) Tribal, state, county, and local government officials and administrative personnel whose official duties include responsibility for activities or components of the affected environment related to the proposed Army action.
(3) Local and regional administrators of other federal agencies or commissions that may either control resources potentially affected by the proposed action (for example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service); or who may be aware of other actions by different federal agencies whose effects must be considered with the proposed Army action (for example, the GSA).
(4) Members of existing citizen advisory groups, such as Restoration Advisory Boards and Citizen Advisory Commissions.
(5) Members of identifiable population segments within the potentially affected environments, whether or not they have clearly identifiable leaders or an established organization, such as farmers and ranchers, homeowners, small business owners, minority communities and disadvantaged communities, and tribal governments in accordance with White House Memorandum on Government to Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments (April 29, 1994).
(6) Members and officials of those identifiable interest groups of local or national scope that may have interest in the environmental effects of the proposed action or activity (for example, hunters and fishermen, Izaak Walton League, Sierra Club, and the Audubon Society).
(7) Any person or group that has specifically requested involvement in the specific action or similar actions.
(e) The public involvement processes and procedures through which participation may be solicited include the following:
(1) Direct individual contact. Such interaction can identify persons and their opinions and initial positions, affecting the scope of issues that the EIS must address. Such limited contact may satisfy public involvement requirements when the expected significance and controversy of environmental effects is very limited.
(2) Small workshops or discussion groups.
(3) Larger public gatherings that are held after some formulation of the potential issues. The public is invited to express its views on the proposed courses of action. Public suggestions or alternative courses of action not already identified may be expressed at these gatherings that need not be formal public hearings.
(4) Identifying and applying other processes and procedures to accomplish the appropriate level of public involvement.
(f) The meetings described in paragraph (e) of this section should not be public hearings in the early stages of evaluating a proposed action. Public hearings do not substitute for the full range of public involvement procedures under the purposes and intent, as described in paragraph (e) of this section.
(g) Public surveys or polls may be performed to identify public opinion of a proposed action, as appropriate (AR 335-15).
§ 651.48   Scoping process.
(a) The scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) is intended to aid in determining the scope of the analyses and significant issues related to the proposed action. The process requires appropriate public participation immediately following publication of the NOI in the FR. It is important to note that scoping is not synonymous with a public meeting. The Army policy is that EISs for legislative proposals significantly affecting the environment will go through scoping unless extenuating circumstances make it impractical. In some cases, the scoping process may be useful in the preparation of EAs and should be employed when it is useful.
(b) The scoping process identifies relevant issues related to a proposed action through the involvement of all potentially interested or affected parties (affected federal, state, and local agencies; recognized Indian tribes; interest groups, and other interested persons) in the environmental analysis and documentation. This process should:
(1) Eliminate issues from detailed consideration which are not significant, or which have been covered by prior environmental review; and
(2) Make the analysis and documentation more efficient by providing focus to the effort. Proper scoping identifies reasonable alternatives and the information needed for their evaluation, thereby increasing public confidence in the Army decisionmaking process.
(c) Proper scoping will reduce both costs and time required for an EA or EIS. This is done through the documentation of all potential impacts and the focus of detailed consideration on those aspects of the action which are potentially significant or controversial. To assist in this process the Army will use the Environmental Impact Computer System (EICS) starting in Fiscal Year (FY) 04, as appropriate. This system will serve to structure all three stages of the scoping process (§ 651.49, 651.50, and 651.51) and provide focus on those actions that are important and of interest to the public. While these discussions focus on EIS preparation and documents to support that process, the three phases also apply if scoping is used for an EA. If used in the preparation of an EA, scoping, and documents to support that process, can be modified and adopted to ensure efficient public iteration and input to the decision-making process.
(d) When the planning for a project or action indicates the need for an EIS, the proponent initiates the scoping process to identify the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts for consideration in the EIS (40 CFR 1508.25). The extent of the scoping process (including public involvement) will depend upon:
(1) The size and type of the proposed action.
(2) Whether the proposed action is of regional or national interest.
(3) Degree of any associated environmental controversy.
(4) Importance of the affected environmental parameters.
(5) Significance of any effects on them.
(6) Extent of prior environmental review.
(7) Involvement of any substantive time limits.
(8) Requirements by other laws for environmental review.
(e) The proponent may incorporate scoping in the public involvement (or environmental review) process of other requirements, such as an EA. In such cases, the extent of incorporation is at the discretion of the proponent, working with the affected Army organization or installation. Such integration is encouraged.
(f) Scoping procedures fall into preliminary, public interaction, and final phases. These phases are discussed in §§ 651.49, 651.50, and 651.51, respectively.
§ 651.49   Preliminary phase.
In the preliminary phase, the proponent agency or office identifies, as early as possible, how it will accomplish scoping and with whose involvement. Key points will be identified or briefly summarized by the proponent, as appropriate, in the NOI, which will:
(a) Identify the significant issues to be analyzed in the EIS.
(b) Identify the office or person responsible for matters related to the scoping process. If they are not the same as the proponent of the action, that distinction will be made.
(c) Identify the lead and cooperating agency, if already determined (40 CFR 1501.5 and 1501.6).
(d) Identify the method by which the agency will invite participation of affected parties, and identify a tentative list of the affected parties to be notified. A key part of this preliminary identification is to solicit input regarding other parties who would be interested in the proposed project or affected by it.
(e) Identify the proposed method for accomplishing the scoping procedure.
(f) Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of environmental analyses and the tentative planning and decisionmaking schedule including:
(1) The scoping process itself.
(2) Collection or analysis of environmental data, including required studies.
(3) Preparation of draft and final EISs (DEISs and FEISs), and associated review periods.
(4) Filing of the ROD.
(5) Taking the action.
(6) For a programmatic EIS, preparation of a general expected schedule for future specific implementing (tiered) actions that will involve separate environmental analysis.
(g) If applicable, identify the extent to which the EIS preparation process is exempt from any of the normal procedural requirements of this part, including scoping.
§ 651.50   Public interaction phase.
(a) During this portion of the process, the proponent will invite comments from all affected parties and respondents to the NOI to assist in developing issues for detailed discussion in the EIS. Assistance in identifying possible participants is available from the ODEP.
(b) In addition to the affected parties identified in paragraph (a) of this section, participants should include the following:
(1) Technical representatives of the proponent. Such persons must be able to describe the technical aspects of the proposed action and alternatives to other participants.
(2) One or more representatives of any Army-contracted consulting firm, if one has been retained to participate in writing the EIS or providing reports that the Army will use to create substantial portions of the EIS.
(3) Experts in various environmental disciplines, in any technical area where foreseen impacts are not already represented among the other scoping participants.
(c) In all cases, the participants will be provided with information developed during the preliminary phase and with as much of the following information that may be available:
(1) A brief description of the environment at the affected location. When descriptions for a specific location are not available, general descriptions of the probable environmental effects will be provided. This will also address the extent to which the environment has been modified or affected in the past.
(2) A description of the proposed alternatives. The description will be sufficiently detailed to enable evaluation of the range of impacts that may be caused by the proposed action and alternatives. The amount of detail that is sufficient will depend on the stage of the development of the proposal, its magnitude, and its similarity to other actions with which participants may be familiar.
(3) A tentative identification of “any public environmental assessments and other environmental impact statements that are being or will be prepared that are related to but are not part of the scope of the impact statement under consideration” (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(5)).
(4) Any additional scoping issues or limitations on the EIS, if not already described during the preliminary phase.
(d) The public involvement should begin with the NOI to publish an EIS. The NOI may indicate when and where a scoping meeting will take place and who to contact to receive preliminary information. The scoping meeting is an informal public meeting, and initiates a continuous scoping process, allowing the Army to scope the action and the impacts of alternatives. It is a working session where the gathering and evaluation of information relating to potential environmental impacts can be initiated.
(e) Starting with this information (paragraph (d) of this section), the person conducting the scoping process will use input from any of the involved or affected parties. This will aid in developing the conclusions. The proponent determines the final scope of the EIS. If the proponent chooses not to require detailed treatment of significant issues or factors in the EIS, in spite of relevant technical or scientific objections by any participant, the proponent will clearly identify (in the environmental consequences section of the EIS) the criteria that were used to eliminate such factors.
§ 651.51   The final phase.
(a) The initial scope of the DEIS is determined by the proponent during and after the public interaction phase of the process. Detailed analysis should focus on significant issues (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(2)). To determine the appropriate scope, the proponent must consider three categories of actions, alternatives, and impacts.
(1) The three categories of actions (other than unconnected single actions) are as follows:
(i) Connected actions are those that are closely related and should be discussed in the same impact statement. Actions are connected if they automatically trigger other actions that may require EISs, cannot or will not proceed unless other actions are previously or simultaneously taken, are interdependent parts of a larger action, and depend on the larger action for their justification.
(ii) Cumulative actions are those that, when viewed with other past and proposed actions, have cumulatively significant impacts and should be discussed in the same impact statement.
(iii) Similar actions are those that have similarities which provide a basis for evaluating their environmental consequences together, such as common timing or geography, and may be analyzed in the EIS. Agencies should do so when the best way to assess such actions is to treat them in a single EIS.
(2) The three categories of alternatives are as follows:
(i) No action.
(ii) Other reasonable courses of action.
(iii) Mitigation measures (not in the proposed action).
(3) The three categories of impacts are as follows:
(i) Direct.
(ii) Indirect.
(iii) Cumulative.
(4) The proponent can also identify any public EAs and EISs, prepared by the Army or another federal agency, related to, but not part of, the EIS under consideration (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(5)). Assignments for the preparation of the EIS among the lead and any cooperating agencies can be identified, with the lead agency retaining responsibility for the statement (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(4)); along with the identification of any other environmental review and consultation requirements so the lead and cooperating agencies may prepare other required analyses and studies concurrently with the EIS (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(6)).
(b) The identification and elimination of issues that are insignificant, non-controversial, or covered by prior environmental review can narrow the analysis to remaining issues and their significance through reference to their coverage elsewhere (40 CFR 1501.7(a)(3)).
(c) As part of the scoping process, the lead agency may:
(1) Set time limits, as provided in § 651.14(b), if they were not already indicated in the preliminary phase.
(2) Prescribe overall page limits for the EIS in accordance with the CEQ regulations that emphasize conciseness.
(d) All determinations reached by the proponent during the scoping process will be clearly conveyed to the preparers of the EIS in a Scope of Statement. The Scope of Statement will be made available to participants in the scoping process and to other interested parties upon request. Any scientific or technical conflicts that arise between the proponent and scoping participants, cooperating agencies, other federal agencies, or preparers will be identified during the scoping process and resolved or discussed by the proponent in the DEIS.
§ 651.52   Aids to information gathering.
The proponent may use or develop graphic or other innovative methods to aid information gathering, presentation, and transfer during the three scoping phases. These include methods for presenting preliminary information to scoping participants, obtaining and consolidating input from participants, and organizing determinations on scope for use during preparation of the DEIS. The use of the World Wide Web (WWW) for these purposes is encouraged. Suggested uses include the implementation of a continuous scoping process, facilitating “virtual” public participation, as well as the dissemination of analyses and information as they evolve.
§ 651.53   Modifications of the scoping process.
(a) If a lengthy period exists between a decision to prepare an EIS and the time of preparation, the proponent will initiate the NOI at a reasonable time in advance of preparation of the DEIS. The NOI will state any tentative conclusions regarding the scope of the EIS made prior to publication of the NOI. Reasonable time for public participation will be allowed before the proponent makes any final decisions or commitments on the EIS.
(b) The proponent of a proposed action may use scoping during preparation of environmental review documents other than an EIS, if desired. In such cases, the proponent may use these procedures or may develop modified procedures, as needed.
§ 651.54   Introduction.
(a) Protection of the environment is an Army priority, no matter where the Army actions are undertaken. The Army is committed to pursuing an active role in addressing environmental quality issues in Army relations with neighboring communities and assuring that consideration of the environment is an integral part of all decisions. This section assigns responsibilities for review of environmental effects abroad of major Army actions, as required by Executive Order 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, dated January 4, 1979, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp.,p.356. This section applies to HQDA and Army agencies' actions that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment outside the United States.
(b) Executive Order 12114 and DODD 6050.7, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Department of Defense Actions (planned currently to be replaced by a DODI, Analyzing Defense Actions With the Potential for Significant Impacts Outside the United States) provide guidance for analyzing the environmental impacts of Army actions abroad and in the global commons. Army components will, consistent with diplomatic factors (including applicable Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) and stationing agreements), national security considerations, and difficulties of obtaining information, document the review of potential environmental impacts of Army actions abroad and in the global commons as set forth in DODD 6050.7 (or DODI upon publication). The analysis and documentation of potential environmental impacts of Army actions abroad and in the global commons should, to the maximum extent possible, be incorporated into existing decision-making processes; planning for military exercises, training plans, and military operations.
§ 651.55   Categorical exclusions.
The list of CXs in Appendix B of this part may be used in reviewing potential environmental impacts of major actions abroad and in the global commons, in accordance with DODD 6050.7 (or DODI upon publication) and Executive Order 12114, section 2-5(c).
§ 651.56   Responsibilities.
(a) The ASA(I&E) will:
(1) Serve as the Secretary of the Army's responsible official for environmental matters abroad.
(2) Maintain liaison with the DUSD(IE) on matters concerning Executive Order 12114, DODD 6050.7, and this part.
(3) Coordinate actions with other Secretariat offices as appropriate.
(b) The DEP will:
(1) Serve as ARSTAF proponent for implementation of Executive Order 12114, DODD 6050.7, and this part.
(2) Apply this part when planning and executing overseas actions, where appropriate in light of applicable statutes and SOFAs.
(c) The DCSOPS will:
(1) Serve as the focal point on the ARSTAF for integrating environmental considerations required by Executive Order 12114 into Army plans and activities. Emphasis will be placed on those actions reasonably expected to have widespread, long-term, and severe impacts on the global commons or the territories of foreign nations.
(2) Consult with the Office of Foreign Military Rights Affairs of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Security Affairs) (ASD(ISA)) on significant or sensitive actions affecting relations with another nation.
(d) TJAG, in coordination with the OGC, will provide advice and assistance concerning the requirements of Executive Order 12114 and DODD 6050.7.
(e) The Chief of Public Affairs will provide advice and assistance on public affairs as necessary.