Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/7/1940.302
Timestamp: 2014-12-27 19:32:20
Document Index: 557170539

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1940', '§ 1940', '§ 1940', 'arts 1500', 'art 1508', 'art 1940', 'arts 1940', 'arts 1940', 'art 1940', 'art 1940', 'art 1940', 'art 1940']

7 CFR 1940.302 - Definitions. | LII / Legal Information Institute
CFR › Title 7 › Subtitle B › Chapter XVIII › Subchapter H › Part 1940 › Subpart G › Section 1940.302 7 CFR 1940.302 - Definitions.
There are 2 Updates appearing in the Federal Register for 7 CFR 1940. View below or at eCFR (GPOAccess)
§ 1940.302
Following is a list of definitions that apply to the implementation of this subpart. Please note that § 1940.301(b) of this subpart refers to the Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR parts 1500-1508. Consequently, the definitions contained in part 1508 of the Council's regulations apply to this subpart, as well as those listed below.
Emergency circumstance. One involving an immediate or imminent danger to public health or safety.
Environmental review documents. The documents required by this subpart for the purpose of documenting FmHA or its successor agency under Public Law 103-354's compliance with the environmental laws and regulations applicable to the FmHA or its successor agency under Public Law 103-354 actions covered in this subpart. These documents include:
Form FmHA or its successor agency under Public Law 103-3541940-22, “Environmental Checklist for Categorical Exclusions,”
Form FmHA or its successor agency under Public Law 103-354 1940-21, “Environmental Assessment of Class I Action,”
Environmental Assessment for Class II Actions (exhibit H of this subpart), and
Environmental Impact Statements (EIS).
Flood or flooding. A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of land areas, from the overflow of inland and/or tidal waters, and/or the rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source. Two important classifications of floods are as follows.
A one-percent chance flood or based flood—A flood of a magnitude that occurs once every 100 years on the average. Within any one-year period there is one chance in 100 of the occurrence of such a flood. Most importantly, however, the cumulative risk of flooding increases with time. Statistically, there is about one chance in five that a flood of this magnitude will occur within a 20-year period, the length of time commonly defined as the useful life of a facility. Over a 30-year period, the life of a typical mortgage, the probability of such a flood occurring increases to greater than one chance in four.
A 0.2-percent chance flood—A flood of a magnitude that occurs once every 500 years on the average. (Within any one-year period there is one chance in 500 of the occurrence of such a flood.) As with the one-percent chance flood, the cumulative risk of this flood occurring also increases with time.
Floodplains. Lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters, including flood-prone areas of offshore islands. At a minimum, floodplains consist of those areas subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. The term floodplain will be taken to mean the base floodplain, unless the action involves a critical action, in which case the critical action floodplain is the minimum floodplain of concern.
Base floodplain (or 100-year floodplain)—The area subject to inundation from a flood of a magnitude that occurs once every 100 years on the average (the flood having a one-percent chance of being equalled or exceeded in any given year).
Critical action floodplain (or 500-year floodplain)—The area subject to inundation from a flood of a magnitude that occurs once every 500 years on the average (the flood having 0.2-percent chance of being equalled or exceeded in any given year).
Indirect impacts. Those reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts that result from the additional public facility, residential, commercial, or industrial development or growth that a federally financed project may cause, induce or accommodate. Consequently, indirect impacts often occur later in time than the construction of the Federal project and can be removed in distance from the construction site. For example, a water transmission line may be designed to serve additional residential development. The environmental impacts of that residential development represent an indirect impact of the federally funded water line. Those indirect impacts which deserve the greatest consideration include changes in the patterns of land use, population density or growth rate, and the corresponding changes to air and water quality and other natural systems.
Mitigation measure. A measure(s) included in a project or application for the purpose of avoiding, minimizing, reducing or rectifying identified, adverse environmental impacts. Examples of such measures include:
The deletion, relocation, redesign or other modifications of the project's elements;
The dedication to open space of environmentally sensitive areas of the project site, which would otherwise be adversely affected by the action or its indirect impacts;
Soil erosion and sedimentation plans to control runoff during land-disturbing activities;
The establishment of vegetative buffer zones between project sites and adjacent land uses;
Protective measures recommended by environmental and conservation agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise regarding the project's impacts;
Storm water management plans to control potential downstream flooding effects that would result from a project;
Zoning; and
Reuse of existing facilities as opposed to new construction.
No-action alternative. The alternative of not approving an application for financial assistance, a subdivision feasibility analysis, or an Agency proposal.
Practicable alternative. An alternative that is capable of attainment within the confines of relevant constraints. The test of practicability, therefore, depends upon the particulars of the situation under consideration and those constraints imposed by environmental, economic, legal, social and technological parameters. This test, however, is not limited by the temporary unavailability of sufficient financial resources to implement an alternative. That is, alternatives cannot be rejected solely on the basis of moderately increased costs. The range of alternatives that must be analyzed to determine if a practicable alternative exists includes the following three categories of alternatives:
Alternative project sites or designs,
Alternative projects with similar benefits as the proposed actions, and
The no-action alternative.
Preparer of Environmental Review Documents. The FmHA or its successor agency under Public Law 103-354 official who is responsible for reviewing the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and for completing the appropriate environmental review document. Under the circumstances indicated, the following Agency positions and divisions will act as the preparer of the environmental review documents covered by this subpart.
County Office. When the approval official for the action under review is located at the County Office level, that official will prepare, as required, Environmental Checklist for Categorical Exclusions and Class I and Class II assessments.
District Office. When the approval official for the action under review is located at the District Office level, that official will prepare, as required, Environmental Checklist for Categorical Exclusions and Class I and Class II assessments or may delegate this responsibility to either:
The District Office staff member having primary responsibility for assembling the associated pre-application, application or other case materials, analyzing the materials and developing recommendations for the approval official, or
A County Office staff member having the same responsibilities as the District Office member, if the action is initiated at the County Office level.
State Program Chief. For actions approved within the State Office, the Chief will prepare, as required, Environmental Checklist for Categorical Exclusions and Class I and II assessments or may delegate this responsibility to either:
The appropriate State Office Loan Specialist, if not the State Environmental Coordinator (SEC),
An architect or engineer on the Chief's staff who is not the SEC, or
A District or County Office staff member located within the office in which the action is initiated and having the responsibilities outlined in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section.
State Environmental Coordinator. EIS's for actions within the approval authority of County Supervisors, District Directors, and State Office officials.
Assistant Administrators for Programs. Checklists, assessments, and EIS's for all actions initiated within their program office.
Program Support Staff. Checklists, assessments, and EIS's that the Deputy Administrator for Program Operations requests be done.
Water resource project. Includes any type of construction which would result in either impacts on water quality and the beneficial uses that water quality criteria are designed to protect or any change in the free-flowing characteristics of a particular river or stream to include physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the waterway. This definition encompasses construction projects within and along the banks of rivers or streams, as well as projects involving withdrawals from, and discharges into such rivers or streams. Projects which require Corps of Engineers dredge and fill permits are also water resource projects.
Title 7 published on 2014-01-01The following are only the Rules published in the Federal Register after the published date of Title 7.For a complete list of all Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices view the Rulemaking tab.2014-09-19; vol. 79 # 182 - Friday, September 19, 201479 FR 56217 - Methodology and Formulas for Allocation of Loan and Grant Program Funds
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2014-22309 RIN0570-AA30 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Housing Service, Farm Service Agency Final rule. Effective Date: This rule is effective October 1, 2014. 7 CFR Part 1940 SummaryThe Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS) is publishing this final rule for allocating program funds to its State Offices. This final rule adds two programs—the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) and the Intermediary Relending Program (IRP). In addition, this final rule revises State allocation formulae to account for changes in data reported by the U.S. Bureau of the Census&apos; decennial Census. Finally, this final rule revises the weight percentages associated with each of the allocation criteria; provides flexibility in determining when not to make State allocations for a program; restricts the use of the transition formula and changes the limitations on how much program funds can change when the transition formula is used; adds provisions for making State allocation for other RBS programs, including new ones; and provides consistency, where necessary, in the allocation of RBS program funds to State Offices.
2014-09-18; vol. 79 # 181 - Thursday, September 18, 201479 FR 55965 - Eliminate the 6-Day Reservation Period Requirement for Rural Development Obligations
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2014-21704 RIN0575-ZA01 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Housing Service, Farm Service Agency, Rural Business-Cooperative Services Direct final rule. This rule will become effective January 16, 2015 without further action, unless the Agency receives written adverse comments on or before November 17, 2014. If the Agency receives adverse comments, the Agency will publish a timely document in the Federal Register withdrawing the amendment. Any adverse comments received will be considered under the proposed rule published in this edition of the Federal Register in the proposed rule section. A second public comment period will not be held. Written comments must be received by the Agency or carry a postmark no later than November 17, 2014. 7 CFR Parts 1940, 1942, 1944, 1948, and 1980 SummaryRural Development (RD) is amending the regulations so that an obligation date for all guaranteed loans, direct loans, and grants will no longer be 6 working days from the date of request for reservation of authority. This action is necessary as the 6-day reservation period will be permanently removed from the Commercial Loan Servicing System (CLSS), Guaranteed Loan System (GLS), and Program Loan Accounting System (PLAS). The effect of this action will reduce system or manual intervention when legislative mandates direct cutoff for obligations and/or funding; eliminate program waivers on obligation date; increase consistency with other RD programs; reduce risks with new system implementations, such as the Financial Modernization Management Initiative; and eliminate numerous reconciliation issues between processed obligations and actual obligations for internal RD reports and USDA reporting requirements.
Title 7 published on 2014-01-01The following are ALL rules, proposed rules, and notices (chronologically) published in the Federal Register relating to 7 CFR 1940 after this date.2014-09-19; vol. 79 # 182 - Friday, September 19, 201479 FR 56217 - Methodology and Formulas for Allocation of Loan and Grant Program Funds
79 FR 56020 - Eliminate the 6-Day Reservation Period Requirement for Rural Development Obligations
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2014-21702 RIN0575-ZA01 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Housing Service, Farm Service Agency, Rural Business-Cooperative Services Proposed rule. Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before November 17, 2014. 7 CFR Parts 1940, 1942, 1944, 1948, and 1980 SummaryRural Development (RD) is proposing to amend the regulations so that an obligation date for all guaranteed loans, direct loans, and grants will no longer be 6 working days from the date of request for reservation of authority. This action is necessary as the 6-day reservation period will be permanently removed from the Commercial Loan Servicing System (CLSS), Guaranteed Loan System (GLS), and Program Loan Accounting System (PLAS). The effect of this action will reduce system or manual intervention when legislative mandates direct cutoff for obligations and/or funding; eliminate program waivers on obligation date; increase consistency with other RD programs; reduce risks with new system implementations, such as the Financial Modernization Management Initiative; and eliminate numerous reconciliation issues between processed obligations and actual obligations for internal RD reports and USDA reporting requirements.
2014-09-03; vol. 79 # 170 - Wednesday, September 3, 201479 FR 52239 - Environmental Policies and Procedures; Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and Related Authorities
2014-03-18; vol. 79 # 52 - Tuesday, March 18, 201479 FR 15052 - Methodology and Formulas for Allocation of Loan and Grant Program Funds
typeregulations.gov FR Doc.2014-05491 RIN0570-AA30 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Housing Service, Farm Service Agency Proposed rule. Written comments must be received on or before May 19, 2014 to be assured of consideration. 7 CFR Part 1940 SummaryThe Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS) is proposing to amend its regulations found in 7 CFR part 1940, subpart L for allocating program funds to its State Offices. RBS is proposing to amend 7 CFR part 1940, subpart L to add three programs—the Rural Energy for America Program, the Value-Added Producer Grant program, and the Intermediary Relending Program. In addition, RBS is proposing revisions to its state allocation formulae for existing programs within 7 CFR part 1940, subpart L to account for changes in data reported by the U.S. Bureau of the Census&apos; decennial Census. RBS is also proposing to make various other changes including: revising the weight percentages associated with each of the allocation criteria; providing flexibility in determining when not to make state allocations for a program; restricting the use of the transition formula and changing the limitations on how much program funds can change when the transition formula is used; adding provisions for making state allocation for other RBS programs, including new ones; and providing consistency, where necessary, in the allocation of RBS program funds to State Offices.