Spreadsheet: 225bb100-6141-4f4e-97af-02059bfc579b
Sheet: Instructions

Instructions for Completing the  Environmental Evaluation Worksheet (Form NRCS-CPA-52)
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Evaluation (EE) is “the part of planning that inventories and estimates the potential effects on the human environment of alternative solutions to resource problems”.  (7 CFR 650.4 and GM 190 Part 410.4(D).)  This form provides for the documentation of that part of the planning process, and was designed to assist the conservation planner with compliance requirements for applicable Federal laws, regulations, Executive Orders, and policy.  The form also provides a framework for documenting compliance with applicable State, [NAME] and local requirements.
NRCS is required to conduct an EE on all actions to determine if there is a need for an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  The EE process results in a "Finding" or conclusion (see guidance for "Q" below) that, either further NEPA analysis is required (EA or EIS) or that no EA or EIS is required because: 1) There is no federal action; 2) The action is categorically excluded; or 3) There is an existing NRCS or NRCS-adopted NEPA document that has sufficiently analyzed the effects of this action.  The EE applies to all assistance provided by NRCS (7 CFR 650.5 and GM 190, Part 410.5). The NRCS-CPA-52 form is used by NRCS to document the results of the evaluation and show compliance with NRCS regulations implementing NEPA at 7 CFR Part 650.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | GM 190  Part 410 subpart A
A copy of the NRCS-CPA-52, including supporting documentation such as Special Environmental Concerns Evaluation Procedure Guide Sheets, must be included in the administrative file.   Do not hesitate to attach additional documents if needed to meet environmental evaluation requirements.
COMPLETING THE NRCS-CPA-52
A. | Client Name
B. | Conservation Plan ID # (as applicable)
 | Program Authority (optional):  Identifying the program authority (EQIP, WRP, etc.) can help lead the planner to the appropriate NRCS NEPA document the planner may tier to as addressed later in section "R. Rationale Supporting the Finding".
C. | Identification #:  Record any other relevant client identification # (farm, tract, field #, etc.).
D. | Client's Objective(s) (purpose):  (Record results from planning step 2.)  Briefly summarize the client's stated objective(s) [synonymous to "Purpose" under NEPA]. Refer to Step 2 of the NRCS planning process found in the NPPH, Part 600.22 for help, if needed.  "Purpose" refers to a goal or desired future condition being pursued in the process of meeting the "Need", such as keeping the operation economically viable or meeting TMDL requirements.  Clearly articulated purposes become the decision factors used to decide between the action alternatives. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
E. | Need for Action:  (Record results from planning step 1.)  Describe the underlying need being met. Why is the action being proposed?  What is the root cause of the existing problem or opportunity.  The underlying need will define and shape the alternatives and potentially justify the expenditure of federal funds; therefore it is important to accurately articulate the need(s) based on the identified resource concerns and the landowner objectives.  All alternatives should clearly address an underying need(s).  In conservation planning, a "need" is usually a required improvement in the condition of a natural resource(s), such as when the quality of runoff water from a farm does not meet State standards, or inadequate forage supply and/or grazing strategies are resulting in poor livestock performance. Use information from Steps 3 and 4 of the Conservation Planning Process  to help define the need.  [NAME] here which Resource Concerns need to be addressed in the plan.
F. | Resource Concerns and Existing / Benchmark Conditions:
 | [NAME]  (Record results from planning steps 3 and 4.)  Record the resource concerns that have been identified through the scoping and Resources Inventory and Analysis processes.  Use the Resource Planning Criteria and Measurement and Assessment Tools in Section III of the FOTG to identify Resource Concerns present and compare the potential environmental effects of alternatives.  Include all resource concerns that apply, adding additional sheets as necessary.
 | Documenting Existing/Benchmark Conditions  (Record results from planning step 4.)  Analyze the existing (benchmark) conditions for each relevant concern.  Record the amount, kind, status, location and method of measurement for each identified concern.  For example, if soil erosion were identified as a resource concern, the recorded benchmark might be "64 ac sheet & rill @ 6T/ac/yr, field 3, RUSLE 2." The benchmark is the baseline from which the change in resource condition under the no action and other alternatives is measured. Without it, there is no context for the degree of change.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | Human - Economic and Social Considerations  Below are some examples for what to consider when addressing the Human - Economic and Social Considerations.
 | Land use:
 | ● | Is the present land use suitable for the proposed alternative?
 | ● | Will land use change after practice(s) installation?
 | ● | How will a change affect the operation?  (e.g., [NAME] and Forage Balance Sheet)
 | ● | Will the action affect resources on which people depend for subsistence, employment or recreation?
 | ● | Will land be taken in or out of production?
 | Capital:
 | ● | Does the producer have the funds or ability to obtain the funds needed to implement the proposed alternative?
 | ● | What are the impacts of the cost of the initial investment for this alternative?
 | ● | What are the impacts of any additional annual costs for Operation and Maintenance?
 | ● | What possible impact does implementing this alternative have on the client’s future eligibility for farm programs?
 | Labor:
 | ● | Does the client understand the amount and kind of labor needed to implement, operate and maintain the proposed practice(s)?
 | ● | Does the client have the skills and time to carry out the conservation practice(s) or will they have to hire someone?
 | Management level:
 | ● | Does the client understand the inputs needed to manage the practice(s) and the client's responsibility in obtaining these inputs?
 | ● | Does the client understand their responsibility to maintain practice(s) as planned and implemented?
 | ● | Is it necessary for the client to obtain additional education, or hire a technical consultant, to operate and/or maintain the practice(s)?
 | Profitability:
 | ● | Profitability describes the relative benefits and costs of the farm or ranch operation, and is often measured in dollars.  An activity is profitable if the benefits are greater than the costs.
 | ● | Is the proposed alternative needed and feasible?
 | ● | Do the benefits of improving the current operation outweigh the installation and maintenance costs (positive benefit/cost ratio)?
 | ● | Is there a reasonable expectation of long-term profitability/benefits for the operation if implemented?
 | ● | Will crop, livestock, or wildlife yield increase/decrease?
 | Risk:
 | ● | What is the potential for monetary loss, physical injury, or damage to resources or the environment?
 | ● | Will the proposed alternative aid/risk client participation in USDA programs?
 | ● | Is there flexibility in modifying the conservation plan at a future date?
 | ● | What issues are involved with the timing of installation and maintenance?
 | ● | What are the cash flow requirements of this alternative?
 | ● | What, if any, are the hazards involved? |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | Public Health and Safety:
 | ● | What effect (both positive or negative) will the action have on the client and community with regard to public health and safety?
 | ● | Are there any hazards associated with no action or any of the alternatives about which the client should be informed?
G. | Special Environmental Concerns (Record results from planning steps 3 and 4.) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | Under each Special Environmental Concern, document the current status or condition of the concern.  Record the amount, kind, status, location, and method of measurement or source of information for each special resource concern.  For example, if endangered species habitat is present, under Endangered and Threatened Species, the recorded benchmark condition is “64 ac, I-bat habitat-roosting cover, field 3, FOTG-2.”  If it is determined that no floodplains exist within the affected planning area, document the fact and cite the source.  The benchmark condition would read “not present, FEMA flood map #xxx.” |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Clean Air Act
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | FS1 | FS-2
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Clean Water Act / Waters of the U.S.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Coastal Zone Management
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 | For guidance in addressing special environmental concerns, see NECH Subpart B and the Special Environmental Concern Evaluation Procedure Guide Sheets and Fact Sheets. Document any additional State and/or local special environmental concerns in "K. Other Agencies and Broad Public Concerns".  Attach additional documentation if needed. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Coral Reefs
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | NPPH Part 600.41 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Cultural Resources / Historic Properties
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
H. | Alternatives  (Record results from Planning step 5.) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Endangered and Threatened Species
 | Describe Alternatives  Briefly summarize the practice/system of practices being proposed.  The no action alternative is required.  Alternatives should be formulated to meet the underlying need.  Note that the no action alternative may not meet the underlying need and is still required to be evaluated and compared to other alternatives (see below).  To the extent possible, the alternatives should also prevent additional problems from occurring and take advantage of available opportunities. If there are unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of resources, appropriate alternatives that meet the underlying need must be developed. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Environmental Justice
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Essential Fish Habitat
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Floodplain Management
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 | "No Action":  Include a brief summary of the activities that would be implemented in the absence of USDA asistance (financial or technical).  Unless a change in management direction or intensity will be undertaken, record effects of existing activities.  The "No Action" alternative requires the same level of analysis as other alternatives.  It should answer the question of what impacts are likely to occur (or what the predicted future condition of the identified resource concerns might be) under the landowner's current and planned management strategies without implementation of a federally assisted action. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Invasive Species
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Migratory Birds/Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 | "Alternatives 1,2,etc.":  List here the practices or system of practices being proposed for each alternative.  Indicate if the alternative meets RMS criteria based on your State's requirements. One or more other alternatives may be evaluated to aid in the decision-making process or at the request of the client.  It is beneficial for one alternative to contain the practices that NRCS has determined best address all of the identified resource concerns (RMS alternative) so the client can consider potential future conservation actions. Use additional sheets if necessary. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Natural Areas
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Prime and [NAME]
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Riparian Area
 | It is important to quantify to the extent feasible the differences between each alternative, including the "No Action" alternative.  See "Helpful Tips" in the NECH, Part 610.67 for guidance on narrowing the scope of your analysis when considering alternatives. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | [NAME]
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
I. | Effects of Alternatives  (Record results from planning step 6.) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Wetlands
 | Under "Amount, Status, [NAME]," record the effect of each alternative on the concerns listed, quantifying where possible.  Consider and document both short-term and long-term consequences for all foreseeable direct, indirect, and cumulative effects (described below).  If a change to the concern is predicted, then estimate the amount.  Professional judgment should be used where Planning Criteria or other tools are not available. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | ●Wild and Scenic Rivers
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Guide Sheet |  |  | Fact Sheet
 | Resource Concerns  Use your State's eFOTG Section III Planning Criteria to identify the established threshold levels for resource concerns.  Professional judgment should be used where Planning Criteria or other tools are not available.  Place a check in the "NOT meet PC" box for each resource concern to indicate when FOTG Section III Planning Criteria will not be met (i.e., where additional measures are needed to meet PC). |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to start of NRCS-CPA-52 | 'CPA-52'!A3 | 'CPA-52'!A3
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Go to start of Form Instructions | Instructions!A30
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Go to Resource Considerations Guide Sheet | Instructions!A30 | 'ResourceConsiderations-optional'!A1
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 'ResourceConsiderations-optional'!A1 | 'ResourceConsiderations-optional'!A1 | 'ResourceConsiderations-optional'!A1
 | Analyze effects based on the combined effect of all practices on the resource concern.  For example, if one proposed practice may impact the water quality of an adjacent stream, but another proposed practice such as a buffer may reduce or eliminate the impact, the overall effect is the one that should be recorded here.  As mentioned above, one or more "Other Alternative(s)" may be evaluated to aid in the decision-making process or at the request of the client. Use additional sheets if necessary.
 | "No Action":  Record the impacts that are likely to occur (or what the predicted future condition of the identified resource concerns might be) under the landowner's planned management strategies without implementation of a federally assisted action.  Address impacts to each identified resource concern, quantifying where possible.  If this information is found elsewhere in the conservation plan, simply provide a summary here.
 | "Alternatives 1,2, etc.":  Record the impacts that are likely to occur under each alternative scenario.  Document impacts to each identified resource concern, quantifying where possible.  If this information is found elsewhere in the conservation plan, simply provide a summary here.  Include both short and long-term consequences in the analysis.
 | Categories of Effects to Consider-  There are three categories of effects that must be considered when predicting short- and long-term effects of an alternative on resource concerns:
 |  | Direct effects are caused by the alternative and occur at the same time and place.
 |  | Indirect effects are caused by the alternative and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable (e.g., "downstream" effects).
 |  | Cumulative effects are those that result from all past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. They can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. Cumulative effects are most appropriately analyzed on a watershed or area-wide level.  Cumulative impacts ideally consider "...all actions in the area of potential effect, REGARDLESS of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions." (CEQ 1508.7)
 | The NECH, Part 610.70, "Effects Analysis," provides important information on describing effects so that an adequate analysis can be made and appropriate mitigation measures included when the proposed alternative has adverse effects. (See also [NAME])
J. | Impacts to Special Environmental Concerns (Record results from planning step 6.)
 | Briefly describe the status and/or description of effects on all identified Special Environmental Concerns, and include supporting data as needed.  Document the degree of change in amount/condition, using the same protocols and units of measure used to determine the benchmark condition.  It is important to consider and document both short-term and long-term consequences for all foreseeable direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on these resource concerns.
 | Place a check in the "needs further action" box when effects have not been fully determined or when additional procedural action is needed, such as the need for a permit or completing required consultation with regulatory agencies.  Where consultation with another federal agency is required (e.g., USFWS or NMFS) to determine potential environmental effects, follow established State protocols or contact the appropriate NRCS State Specialist for guidance.  Neither the NEPA Finding in Section "Q" nor practice implementation should occur until all required consultations and coordination with the appropriate agency have been completed and all necessary permits provided.  Planning and practice implementation may continue for practices not involved in required consultation/coordination efforts only if they are not connected to, or dependent on, the other action. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | Complete applicable Evaluation Procedure Guide Sheets or other state specific documentation as needed and include them in the client's administrative file.  If the Special Environmental Concern is not present in the project area then there is no need to attach the Guide Sheet.  Completion of Guide Sheets is not mandatory, but appropriate documentation must be provided.  Check your own States' guidance for compliance and planning requirements.
K. | Other Agencies and Broad Public Concerns:  List any necessary easements, permissions, or permits (e.g., Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, wetland mitigation easements, state or county permits) required to implement the alternatives.  Remember that identifying needed permits for ALL alternatives may be an important decision criteria between alternatives and should be considered during the planning process.
 | Relay public concerns related to land-use, demographics, landscape characteristics, or other Federal, Tribal, State, and local laws/regulations.  Document the impacts of each alternative on these issues.  Responses will impact the selection of an alternative as well as issues surrounding "significance."
 | Document contact and communications with USFWS, NOAA-NMFS, Corps, EPA, SWCD's, NRCS State Office, State/Tribal/local environmental agencies, etc., and others consulted, including public participation activities. The NECH provides important information on public participation requirements.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | Cumulative Effects.  (See NECH Exhibit 610.126)  A cumulative impact is defined as "the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time" (40 CFR 1508.70). Cumulative effects include the direct and indirect effects of a project together with the effects from reasonably foreseeable future actions of others. For a project to be reasonably foreseeable, it must have advanced far enough in the planning process that its implementation is likely.  Reasonably foreseeable future actions are not speculative, are likely to occur based on reliable resources and are typically characterized in planning documents.  Add additional pages as needed.
L. | Mitigation:  Include here any mitigation measures that are NOT already incorporated in the alternatives that will offset any adverse impacts.  This may include conditions included in required permits.  Briefly describe or reference all mitigation measures to be applied for each alternative.  Mitigation actions for the preferred (selected) alternative must be included in the conservation plan, designs, and specifications.
 | As referenced in CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.20) and NECH (Part 610.71), mitigation includes:
 | ● | Avoiding the impacts altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
 | ● | Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree of magnitude of the action and its implementation.
 | ● | Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | ● | Reducing or eliminating impact over time by preservation/maintenance operations during action life.
 | ● | Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.
M. | Preferred Alternative:  (Record results from planning step 7.)
 | Record the alternative to be implemented and indicate why it was chosen.  Ultimately, the client will decide what actions will occur on their land, but NRCS funding or assistance may not always be appropriate for that action.  For NRCS assistance to proceed, the alternative must clearly address the underlying need(s) as identified in "E".  The Objective(s) (Purpose) stated in "D" serves as the decision factors between alternatives.
N. | Context:  Record the context used in the alternatives analysis.  [NAME] 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.
O. | Determination of Significance or Extraordinary Circumstances:  NRCS evaluates each action using its list of special environmental concerns along with the significance factors to determine whether an action has extraordinary circumstances.  Action(s) that have potential for significant impacts on the human environment cannot be categorically excluded.  Thus, in the absence of any extraordinary circumstances the actions can preceed without the preparation of an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). Where extraordinary circumstances are determined to exist, the categorical exclusion will not apply.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | Categorical Exclusions (CE):  Before documenting the use of a categorical exclusion, it is important to read Section 610.46 of the NECH.  This section provides a list of all categorical exclusions that apply to actions as well as more detailed considerations and requirements for their use.  For an action to be categorically excluded, there must be appropriate documentation on the NRCS-CPA-52 indicating that the proposed action does not meet any of the criteria for “significance,” as discussed above.  These criteria are also known as “extraordinary circumstances” when discussing categorical exclusions.  If any part of a proposed plan involves actions that are NOT on the list of allowable categorical exclusions, the entire plan is not eligible for a categorical exclusion.
 | To complete the determination on the NRCS-CPA-52, check "yes" or "no" for each of the questions.  If you are not sure about the answer, contact your State Environmental [NAME] for assistance.  The NRCS-CPA-52 must provide evidence to conclude that the activity will not result in extraordinary circumstances or significant adverse environmental effects on the quality of the human environment, either individually or cumulatively.  If any of the extraordinary circumstances are found to apply to the proposed action, then you should determine whether the proposal can be modified to mitigate the adverse effects and prevent the extraordinary circumstances. If this can be done and the client agrees to any necessary change(s) in the proposed action to avoid significant adverse impacts, then the proposed action is to be modified and implemented. If the proposed action cannot be modified or the client refuses to accept a proposed change, then Item 5 in Section “Q” must be checked for the NRCS NEPA Compliance Finding to indicate that additional analysis and documentation is needed.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
Part "P" is completed by the planner and Parts "Q" thru "S" must be completed by the Responsible Federal Official (RFO).   If NRCS is providing planning assistance for another federal agency, then the NRCS planner must sign Section "P" as the planner.  The RFO for the lead agency (e.g., FSA for CRP) will complete everything below the planner’s signature.  For NRCS the State Conservationist is the RFO, but they may delegate that authority to a designated agency representative.  Normally, the authority to serve as RFO is delegated to an Area or Field Office employee for farm bill program agreements.  Check with your State Office or State [NAME] if you have questions.
P. | Signature (planner):  The individual completing Parts "A" thru "O" of the NRCS-CPA-52 must sign and date to indicate they have used the best available information. This may or may not be the same person as the agency representative.  In cases where the planner is not an NRCS employee, they must sign in the first signature area and then the NRCS will sign in the second signature area to confirm and validate the information as the responsible agency.  When NRCS plans on behalf of another agency, NRCS need sign only as the planner and then the lead agency RFO will complete the rest of the NRCS-CPA-52.
Q. | NEPA Compliance Finding (check one):  This finding will determine the appropriate NEPA action required. Instructions below correspond to the option numbers in Section "Q" of the Form.  In Section "R"  document the rationale for your Finding.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | 1) | Federal actions do NOT include situations in which NRCS (or any other federal agency) provides technical assistance (CTA) only.  The agency cannot control what the client ultimately does with that assistance.  Non-Federal actions include, but are not limited to:
 |  | ● | NRCS providing HEL or wetland conservation determinations.
 |  | ● | NRCS providing technical designs where there is no federal financial assistance.
 |  | ● | NRCS providing planning assistance or other technical assistance and information to individuals, organizations, States, or local governments where there is no federal financial assistance or other control of the decision or action.
 | 2) | CE actions are a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment; therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. First determine whether the proposed action is a categorically excluded action as identified in NRCS or USDA regulations implementing NEPA.  (USDA and NRCS categorical exclusions are listed in the NECH, Part 610.46.)  Note that there may be overarching or CE-specific side boards that must be met in order to apply a CE.  If the proposed action is listed as a CE action, then assess whether there are any applicable extraordinary circumstances that would prevent the action from being eligible as a CE. Check this box only if the action is categorically excluded AND there are no EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES associated with the proposed action.  (See NECH Exhibit 610.116, "How to Use NRCS’s Categorical Exclusions.”)
 | 3) | Check this box if there is an existing NRCS NEPA document that has sufficiently analyzed the action being proposed.  A number of NRCS National Programmatic NEPA documents have analyzed effects of many practices planned under nationwide conservation programs.  There may also be Regional, State, or area wide Programmatic NEPA documents that can be referred to.  For information about "Tiering" to existing NRCS NEPA documents see the NECH Part 610.81.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | http://policy.nrcs.usda.gov/viewerFS.aspx?id=2926
 |  | Keep in mind that Programmatic EA's and EIS's are not site-specific so they do not attempt to describe every possible type of effect resulting from actions that could be taken.  Thus, you must use your knowledge of site-specific conditions to decide if additional analysis is needed. Network diagrams illustrating general effects of conservation practices are associated with national or State EA's or EIS's.  These diagrams may help in analyzing effects of practices.  If the planner believes the site-specific impacts are outside the range of effects described in the programmatic EA or EIS, this box may not be checked.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/envicomp.html | http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/envicomp.html | http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/envicomp.html | http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/envicomp.html | http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/envicomp.html
 |  | Copies of NRCS national programmatic NEPA documents may be viewed on NRCS’ Environmental Compliance web page.
 | 4) | It is possible to tier to NEPA documents prepared by other Federal agencies if those documents have been formally adopted by NRCS as outlined in the NECH 610.83 and CEQ regulations 40 CFR1506.3.  NRCS must have prepared and published the agency's own Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for an EA or Record of Decision for an EIS in order for a NEPA document to be "adopted".  For information about "Tiering" to NEPA documents see the NECH Section 610.81.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 'CPA-52'!A315 | 'CPA-52'!A315 | 'CPA-52'!A315
 | 5) | If 1), 2), 3), or 4) do not apply, the action may cause a significant effect on the quality of the human environment and an EA or EIS may be required.  Additional analysis may be required to comply with NEPA. Contact the State Environmental Liaision or equivalent for guidance on completing this analysis and provide them with a copy of the NRCS-CPA-52 and supporting documentation.
R. | Rationale Supporting the Finding:  Explain the reasons for making the "Finding" in "Q".
 | If "Q 1)" was selected, explain why the action is NOT a federal action subject to NRCS regulations implementing NEPA.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Return to NRCS-CPA-52
 | If "Q 2)" was selected, document the categorical exclusion(s) applicable to the entirety of the proposed action and indicate that there are no extraordinary circumstances.
 | If "Q 3)" was selected, identify any applicable NRCS NEPA document.  Record the citation of the NRCS NEPA document you are tiering to.
 | If "Q 4)" was selected, identify any applicable NRCS NEPA document that was officially adopted from another agency.  Record the citation of the NRCS adopted NEPA document you are tiering to.
 | If " Q 5)"was selected, document your analysis and provide this information (NRCS-CPA-52 and supporting documents) to your State Environmental [NAME] or equivalent.
S. | Signature of Responsible Federal Official (RFO):  The appropriate agency RFO must sign and date.  The RFO should wait to make the finding until all consultations, permits, etc., are finalized.  This signature certifies that the proposed action/plan complies with all NRCS policies implementing NEPA and all other applicable Federal, State, [NAME] and local laws/Executive Orders.