Opinion ID: 458564
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: NEPA's Implementing Regulations

Text: 48 NEPA directs all agencies of the Federal Government to prepare impact statements for every major Federal action[ ] significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 4332(2)(C). The Act also creates the Council on Environmental Quality. Id. Sec. 4342. The CEQ has promulgated regulations, 40 C.F.R. pt. 1500, designed to tell federal agencies what they must do to comply with the procedures and achieve the goals of [NEPA]. Id. Sec. 1500.1. These regulations are binding on federal agencies. See Sierra Club v. Sigler, 695 F.2d at 972 (citing Andrus v. Sierra Club, 442 U.S. 347, 356-58, 99 S.Ct. 2335, 2340-41, 60 L.Ed.2d 943 (1979)). The CEQ guidelines provide a broad framework for NEPA compliance, but also direct federal agencies to promulgate their own regulations for implementing the Act. See 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1507.3. The Corps has complied with this mandate. See Policy and Procedures for Implementing NEPA, 33 C.F.R. pt. 230. The CEQ has directed agencies to, among other things, list (1) those actions which normally require preparation of an EIS and (2) those actions which normally do not require preparation of an EA or an EIS. See 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1501.4. If a proposed action fits into neither category, the agency should prepare an EA. Id. Sec. 1501.4(b). The Corps has determined that regulatory permits are actions normally requiring an ... EA but not necessarily an EIS. 33 C.F.R. Sec. 230.7(e); see also 33 C.F.R. pt. 230, App. B. The purpose of an EA is to provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an [EIS]. 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1508.9(a)(1); see also 33 C.F.R. Sec. 230.9(a). An EA, moreover, will result in one of two findings: (1) a finding that an EIS must, because of potentially significant environmental impacts, be prepared for the proposed action or (2) a FONSI--a finding that the proposed action will not have significant effects on the environment. 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1501.4(c)-(e), 1508.13; 33 C.F.R. Sec. 230.10. 49 An EA should be brief. 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1508.9; 33 C.F.R. Sec. 230.9(b) (an EA should not normally exceed 15 pages). An EA should, however, include brief discussions of the need for the proposal, of alternatives ..., of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, and a listing of agencies and persons consulted. 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1508.9(b); see also 33 C.F.R. Sec. 230.9(c). While the discussion of these factors should be brief, it should also be sufficient to demonstrate reasoned decision making. See Foundation on Economic Trends v. Heckler, 756 F.2d 143, 154 (D.C.Cir.1985) ([s]imple, conclusory statements of 'no impact' are not enough). Moreover, [a]n [EA] that fails to address a significant environmental concern can hardly be deemed adequate for a reasoned determination that an EIS is not appropriate. Id. at 154. 50 Before preparing an EA on proposed action, the Corps must consult with other federal agencies. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. Secs. 661 et seq., for example, directs federal agencies to consult with USFWS and NMFS before allowing bodies of water to be dredged. Id. Sec. 662(a); see also 33 C.F.R. Sec. 320.4(c) (Corps regulations for coordination under the Act with USFWS and NMFS); 33 C.F.R. Sec. 320.4(b), (c) (Corps regulations for coordination with USFWS and NMFS in cases affecting wetlands). 51 As is readily apparent, the decision whether to prepare an EIS may turn in large part on the definition of the term significantly. The CEQ has defined significantly as follows: 52 Significantly as used in NEPA requires considerations of both context and intensity: 53 (a) Context. This means that the significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts such as society as a whole (human, national), the affected region, the affected interests, and the locality. Significance varies with the setting of the proposed action. For instance, in the case of a site-specific action, significance would usually depend upon the effects in the locale rather than in the world as a whole. Both short- and long-term effects are relevant. 54 (b) Intensity. This refers to the severity of the impact. Responsible officials must bear in mind that more than one agency may make decisions about partial aspects of a major action. The following should be considered in evaluating intensity:(1) Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial. 55 (2) The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety. 56 (3) The unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. 57 (4) The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. 58 (5) The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. 59 (6) The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. 60 (7) Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Significance exists if it is reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the environment. Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts. 61 (8) The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources. 62 (9) The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. 63 (10) Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. 64 40 C.F.R. Sec. 1508.27 (emphasis added).