Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act, 43649-43653 [E9-20674]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
signed October 3, 2008, and effective
October 31, 2008, is to be amended as
follows:
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending
Upward from 700 Feet or More Above the
Surface of the Earth.
*
*
*
*
*
AAL AK E5 Elim, AK [New]
Elim Airport, Elim, AK
(Lat. 64°36′54″ N., Long. 162°16′14″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.8-mile
radius of the Elim Airport, AK, and within
3.7 miles either side of the 015° bearing from
the Elim Airport, AK, extending from the 6.8mile radius to 12.6 miles north of the Elim
Airport, AK; and that airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface
within a 74-mile radius of the Elim Airport,
AK.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Anchorage, AK, on August 20,
2009.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information
Area Group.
[FR Doc. E9–20727 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Dated: August 14, 2009.
Michael G. Ensch,
Chief, Operations, Directorate of Civil Works.
[FR Doc. E9–20292 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
33 CFR Part 334
Disestablishment of Restricted Area
for Pascagoula Naval Station,
Pascagoula, MS
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 3710–92–P
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME
DoD.
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
38 CFR Part 200
The U.S. Navy (USN)
requested that the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) disestablish the
restricted area at the former Naval
Station Pascagoula in Pascagoula,
Mississippi. The restricted area was
established on November 9, 1992. The
purpose of the restricted area was to
reduce safety hazards and security risks
and protect persons and property from
dangers encountered in the area. As a
result of the 2005 Base Realignment and
Closure Act, the Naval Station was
closed on June 1, 2007, and the property
transferred to the State of Mississippi. In
the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of
Federal Register, we are publishing the
restricted area disestablishment as a
direct final rule without prior proposal
because we view this as a noncontroversial adjustment to our
restricted area regulations and
SUMMARY:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
anticipate no adverse comment. We
have explained our reasons for this
approval in the preamble to the direct
final rule. If we receive no adverse
comment, we will not take further
action on this rule and it will go into
effect. If we receive adverse comment,
we will withdraw the direct final rule
and it will not take effect. We will
address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. We will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by September 28, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
David Olson, Headquarters, Operations
and Regulatory Community of Practice,
Washington, DC at 202–761–4922 or Mr.
John B. McFadyen, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Mobile District, at 251–690–
3222.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
document concerns the
‘‘Disestablishment of Restricted Area for
Pascagoula Naval Station, Pascagoula,
MS’’ rule. For further information,
including instructions on how to submit
comments, please see the information
provided in the direct final rule that is
located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’
section of this Federal Register
publication.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:24 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
[Docket No. AFRH 2009–01]
RIN 3030–ZA00
Compliance With the National
Environmental Policy Act
AGENCY:
Armed Forces Retirement
Home.
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Armed Forces Retirement
Home (AFRH) proposes regulations
establishing policy and assigning
responsibilities for implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969, related laws, executive
orders, and regulations in the decisionmaking process of the AFRH. These
regulations were developed to comply
with Section 103 of 42 U.S.C. 4321.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
October 1, 2009.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43649
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by AFRH 2009–01, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Timothy Cox, COO, AFRH,
3700 N. Capitol St., NW., P.O. Box 1303,
Washington, DC 20011–8400.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Timothy
Cox, COO, AFRH, 3700 N. Capitol St.,
NW., Washington, DC 20011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe
Woo, Master Planner, (202) 730–3445.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
proposed rule is not a major rule for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866. As
required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, AFRH certifies that this proposed
rule will not have a significant impact
on small business entities.
This proposed rule will set out
environmental policy for the Armed
Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) and
provide direction for carrying out the
procedural requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. These
regulations were developed to comply
with Section 103 of 42 U.S.C. 4321.
Electronic Access and Filing
You may submit comments by
sending electronic mail (E-mail) to:
Tim.Sheckler@gsa.gov. Include RIN
number in the subject line of the
message. You may also fax comments to
202–205–5295, Attn: Mr. Tim Scheckler.
Instructions
All submissions received must
include the agency name and document
number for this rulemaking.
Docket
For access to the docket to read
background documents or comments
received, go to 3700 North Capitol
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20011.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 200
Compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Armed Forces Retirement
Home (AFRH) proposes to amend 38
CFR Chapter II by adding Part 200 to
read as follows:
PART 200—COMPLIANCE WITH THE
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
ACT
Sec.
200.1 Purpose.
200.2 Background.
200.3 Responsibilities.
200.4 Implementation of NEPA and related
authorities.
200.5 Coordination with other authorities.
200.6 Public involvement.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
43650
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
200.7 Cooperating agencies.
200.8 AFRH participation in NEPA
compliance by other agencies.
Appendix A to Part 200—Categorical
Exclusions
Appendix B to Part 200—The Action
Requiring an Environmental Assessment
Appendix C to Part 200—Actions Requiring
Environmental Impact Statement
Authority: 24 U.S.C. 401, et seq.
§ 200.1
Purpose.
These regulations set out AFRH
environmental policy and provide
direction for carrying out the procedural
requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
related legal authorities.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 200.2
Background.
(a) The NEPA and the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations
implementing the procedural
requirements of NEPA (40 CFR 1500
through 1508, hereinafter, the CEQ
regulations) require that each Federal
agency consider the impact of its actions
on the human environment and
prescribe procedures to be followed.
Other laws, executive orders, and
regulations provide related direction.
NEPA establishes and AFRH adopts as
policy that as a Federal agency, AFRH
will: Use all practicable means,
consistent with other essential
considerations of national policy, to
improve and coordinate Federal plans,
functions, programs, and resources to
the end that the Nation may:
(1) Fulfill the responsibilities of each
generation as trustee of the environment
for succeeding generations;
(2) Assure for all Americans safe,
healthful, productive, and esthetically
and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(3) Attain the widest range of
beneficial uses of the environment
without degradation, risk to health or
safety, or other undesirable and
unintended consequences;
(4) Preserve important historic,
cultural, and natural aspects of our
national heritage, and maintain,
wherever possible, an environment
which supports diversity, and variety of
individual choice;
(5) Achieve a balance between
population and resource use which will
permit high standards of living and a
wide sharing of life’s amenities; and
(6) Enhance the quality of renewable
resources and approach the maximum
attainable recycling of depletable
resources.
(b) As an important means of carrying
out this policy, AFRH will analyze and
consider the impacts of its proposed
actions (activities, programs, projects,
legislation) and any reasonable
alternatives on the environment, and on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:24 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
the relationship of people with the
environment. This analysis is to be
undertaken early in planning any such
action, as an aid to deciding whether the
action will go forward, and if so how.
Consideration must be given to
reasonable alternative means of
achieving the purpose and need for the
proposed action, and to the alternative
of not taking the proposed action. The
analysis is to be completed, and used to
inform the decision maker and make the
public aware of the action’s potential
impacts, before the decision is made
about whether and how to proceed with
the action. Relevant environmental
documents, comments, and responses
regarding the proposal will accompany
the proposal and be presented to the
AFRH decision maker for their
consideration.
(c) NEPA also requires and AFRH will
ensure that, to the fullest extent
possible, analyses and consultations
required by other environmental laws be
coordinated with those required under
NEPA, to reduce redundancy,
paperwork, time, and cost.
(d) The AFRH is an independent
Federal agency that provides residence
and related services for certain retired
and former members of the Armed
Forces. The AFRH has property in
Washington, DC and Gulfport, MS.
(e) This part contains AFRH’s general
policy regarding NEPA implementation
and sets out AFRH procedures that
supplement the CEQ regulations for
meeting NEPA requirements. It also
assigns responsibilities to the Chief
Operating Officer (COO) for the AFRH
and the Master Planner. These
regulations provide further detail
regarding the conduct of NEPA impact
analyses.
§ 200.3
Responsibilities.
(a) The COO is the AFRH NEPA
official responsible for compliance with
NEPA for AFRH actions. The COO also
provides the AFRH’s views on other
agencies’ environmental impact
statements (EIS).
(b) The Master Planner is the point of
contact for information on: AFRH NEPA
documents; NEPA oversight activities;
and review of other agencies’ EISs and
NEPA documents.
(c) The AFRH’s assigned counsel is
the point of contact for legal questions
involving environmental matters.
§ 200.4 Implementation of NEPA and
related authorities.
(a) Classification of AFRH actions. (1)
All AFRH proposed actions typically
fall into one of the following three
classes, in terms of requirements for
review under NEPA: Categorical
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
exclusions, environmental assessments,
and environmental impact statements.
(2) The Master Planner, is responsible
for classifying proposed actions and
undertaking the level of analysis,
consultation, and review appropriate to
each.
(b) Categorical Exclusions (CATEX).
(1) A categorical exclusion (CATEX) is
a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment, except under
extraordinary circumstances (42 CFR
1508.4). Because they lack the potential
for effect, they do not require detailed
analysis or documentation under NEPA.
(i) Determining when to use a CATEX
(screening criteria). To use a CATEX,
the proponent must satisfy the following
three screening conditions:
(A) The action has not been
segmented. Determine that the action
has not been segmented to meet the
definition of a CATEX. 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.
(B) No exceptional circumstances
exist. Determine if the action involves
extraordinary circumstances that would
preclude the use of a CATEX (see
4(b)(1)(ii)(A) through (xiv) of this
section).
(C) One (or more) CATEX (See
Appendix A to Part 200) encompasses
the proposed action. Identify a CATEX
(or multiple CATEXs) that potentially
encompasses the proposed action. If no
CATEX 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.
(ii) Extraordinary circumstances that
preclude the use of a CATEX are:
(A) Reasonable likelihood of
significant effects on public health,
safety, or the environment.
(B) Reasonable likelihood of
significant environmental effects (direct,
indirect, and cumulative).
(C) Imposition of uncertain or unique
environmental risks.
(D) Greater scope or size than is
normal for this category of action.
(E) Reportable releases of hazardous
or toxic substances as specified in 40
CFR part 302.
(F) Releases of petroleum, oils, and
lubricants, application of pesticides and
herbicides, or where the proposed
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
action results in the requirement to
develop or amend a Spill Prevention,
Control, or Countermeasures Plan.
(G) When a review of an action
reveals that air emissions exceed de
minimis levels or otherwise that a
formal Clean Air Act conformity
determination is required.
(H) Reasonable likelihood of violating
any Federal, State, or local law or
requirements imposed for the protection
of the environment.
(I) Unresolved effect on
environmentally sensitive resources, as
defined in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(J) Involving effects on the quality of
the environment that are likely to be
highly controversial.
(K) Involving effects on the
environment that are highly uncertain,
involve unique or unknown risks, or are
scientifically controversial.
(L) Establishes a precedent (or makes
decisions in principle) for future or
subsequent actions that are reasonably
likely to have a future significant effect.
(M) 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.
(N) Introduction/employment of
unproven technology.
(iii) 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 CATEX cannot be
used. Environmentally sensitive
resources include:
(A) Listed or proposed Federally
listed, threatened, or endangered
species or their designated or proposed
critical habitats.
(B) Properties listed or eligible for
listing on the National Register of
Historic Places.
(C) 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.
(iv) The use of a CATEX does not
relieve the proponent from compliance
with other statutes, such as RCRA, or
consultations under the Endangered
Species Act or the NHPA. Such
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:24 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
consultations may be required to
determine the applicability of the
CATEX screening criteria.
(v) For those CATEXs that require
documentation, a brief (one to two
sentences) presentation of conclusions
reached during screening should be
included with the checklist. Checklists
may be obtained from the Master
Planner at 3700 North Capitol Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20011.
(2) AFRH recognizes two types of
CATEX:
(i) CATEX—does not require
documentation unless the Master
Planner determines that an
extraordinary circumstance may exist,
whereupon a CATEX—requires
documentation that must be prepared
(see below). The likelihood of such a
circumstance is judged to be so low that
no specific environmental document is
typically required.
(ii) CATEX—requires documentation
that involves a cursory review to ensure
that no extraordinary circumstances
exist. For an action falling into such a
category, a CATEX requiring
documentation is completed to support
a determination by the Master Planner,
as to whether the action needs further
review under NEPA. A CATEX
documentation is developed and
maintained by the Master Planner.
(3) CATEXs requiring and not
requiring documentation are listed in
Appendix A of these regulations.
(c) Environmental Assessment (EA).
(1) An Environmental Assessment (EA)
is a concise public document prepared
by or on behalf of AFRH that assists
AFRH in deciding whether or not there
may be significant effects requiring a
more detailed Environmental Impact
Statement. Actions typically requiring
preparation of an EA are found in
Appendix B to Part 200.
(2) The analysis required for an EA
leads either to a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) or a Notice
of Intent (NOI) to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement. AFRH
will prepare a FONSI in accordance
with 40 CFR 1508.13, if the agency
determines on the basis of the EA that
there are no significant environmental
effects and therefore, there is no need to
prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement. AFRH shall make the FONSI
available to the affected public as
specified in § 1506.6. Under certain
limited circumstances, AFRH shall
make the finding of no significant
impact available for public review for 30
days before the agency makes its final
determination whether to prepare an
environmental impact statement and
before the action may begin. The
circumstances are:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43651
(i) The proposed action is, or is
closely similar to, one which normally
requires the preparation of an
environmental impact statement;
(ii) The nature of the proposed action
is one without precedent; or
(iii) There is controversy associated
with the environmental effects of the
proposed action.
(d) Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS). (1) An Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) is a detailed analysis
and report, that presents the
environmental effects of a proposed
action and its reasonable alternatives.
An EIS is prepared for any AFRH action
that may have significant effects on the
quality of the human environment. A
Notice of Intent will be prepared and
published in the Federal Register as
soon as practicable after deciding to
prepare an EIS. When a lengthy period
of time will elapse between the decision
to prepare the EIS and preparation of
the EIS, the notice of intent should be
published at a reasonable time prior to
preparing the EIS.
(2) Certain AFRH actions are likely to
have significant effects on the quality of
the human environment, and hence
typically require an EIS. These classes
of action are listed in Appendix C to
Part 200.
(3) When it appears that the action is
likely to have significant effects on the
quality of the human environment,
AFRH will prepare an EIS. An action
that typically requires an EIS is found
in Appendix C to Part 200. An EA may
be prepared to aid in deciding whether
an EIS is needed, or the responsible
official may decide to prepare an EIS
without preparing an EA.
(4) Direction for preparing,
circulating, finalizing, and using an EIS
in decision making is found in the CEQ
Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through
1508).
(e) Supplemental statements. If an EA
or an EIS has been completed and the
AFRH goes to implement the action, but
no action has been taken within four
years of the completion of the EA or EIS,
the AFRH will review the document to
determine if circumstances have
changed that would warrant a
supplement to the original document. A
supplemental statement will be
provided to the decision maker to
inform the decisions on whether and
how to proceed with the proposed
action and be maintained with the
previous EA or EIS and related records
for the proposed action.
(f) Using NEPA in decision making.
(1) Compliance with NEPA and related
authorities will begin at the earliest
point in planning any action, when the
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
43652
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
widest reasonable range of alternatives
is open for consideration.
(2) The NEPA review process will be
carried out in coordination with
continued planning.
(3) All personnel involved in
planning actions should view NEPA
review as part of effective planning, not
as a mere documentation requirement.
(4) Outside agencies, State and local
governments, Indian Tribes, and the
public will whenever practicable be
afforded reasonable opportunities to
participate in the NEPA process.
(5) The results of NEPA review will be
fully considered by each AFRH
decision-maker before making a
decision on an action subject to such
review and the alternatives considered
by the decision-maker will be
encompassed within the range of
alternatives for the action.
(6) AFRH will ensure relevant
environmental documents, comments,
and responses are part of the record in
formal rulemaking or adjudicatory
proceedings.
(7) Executives and other employees
responsible for aspects of NEPA review
will be held accountable for the
performance of such responsibilities,
through performance reviews and other
administrative mechanisms.
§ 200.5 Coordination with other
authorities.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
(a) To the maximum extent feasible,
NEPA review shall be coordinated with
review of proposed actions under other
environmental legal authorities,
including but not limited to the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA); the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA); the
Endangered Species Act (ESA);
Executive Orders 11988, 11990, and
13006; and other applicable authorities.
(b) In effecting such coordination,
responsible AFRH officials will ensure
that the substantive and procedural
requirements of other environmental
authorities are met, together with the
requirements of NEPA. It will be
explicitly understood that compliance
with NEPA does not substitute for
compliance with other environmental
authorities, nor does compliance with
such other authority substitute for
compliance with NEPA.
§ 200.6
Public involvement.
(a) As part of its system for NEPA
compliance, the COO and the Master
Planner shall provide for levels and
kinds of public involvement appropriate
to the proposed action and its likely
effects.
(b) Where a related authority provides
specific procedures for public
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:24 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
involvement, the responsible AFRH
official shall ensure that such
procedures where practicable in the
process of NEPA review.
(c) Public involvement in the AFRH
NEPA process shall have as its purpose
the full disclosure of AFRH actions and
alternatives to the public, within the
constraints of AFRH program
authorities, and giving the public a full
opportunity to comment on the
environmental effects of AFRH
proposals.
(d) Pursuant to Executive Order
12898, special efforts will be made to
involve members of potentially affected
low-income and minority communities
in NEPA review and decision-making.
Such efforts may include, but are not
limited to, special programs of
community outreach, including crosscultural programs, translations of
pertinent documents, and ensuring that
translators are available at public
meetings.
(e) Information pertaining to AFRH
actions and/or NEPA documentation
can be obtained through the Master
Planner at 3700 North Capitol Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20011.
§ 200.7
Cooperating agencies.
(a) Federal agencies with jurisdiction
by law will be invited to serve as
cooperating agencies and Federal
agencies with special expertise may be
invited to serve as cooperating agencies
in the conduct of NEPA review of an
AFRH proposed action.
(b) The responsible AFRH official will
invite other Tribal, State, and local
agencies to serve as cooperating
agencies with subject matter jurisdiction
or special expertise in the conduct of
NEPA review of an AFRH proposed
action.
§ 200.8 AFRH participation in NEPA
compliance by other agencies.
(a) AFRH may participate in the
NEPA process as a cooperating agency
for another lead agency’s project, or as
a commenter/reviewer of another
agency’s NEPA document. AFRH may
also participate in environmental
studies carried out by non-Federal
parties (for example, a local government
conducting studies under a State
environmental policy law) where such
studies are relevant to AFRH’s interests
or may be incorporated by AFRH into its
own studies under NEPA. Where AFRH
will be responsible for a decision on a
project that is the subject of such a
study, and has the authority to do so,
AFRH will ensure that the study and its
resulting documents meet the standards
set forth in these regulations in
coordination with the COO.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(b) As a cooperating agency, AFRH
participates in the NEPA process as
requested by the lead agency, in
accordance with 40 CFR 1501.6 of the
CEQ regulations. Tasks may include
participating in meetings and providing
specific information relevant to the
matters over which it has jurisdiction by
law or expertise.
(c) AFRH comments shall be prepared
in consultation with, or by, the Master
Planner.
(d) The responsible AFRH official
may provide comments and/or reviews
of another agency’s NEPA documents,
and/or other Federal and State
environmental documents.
(e) AFRH comments shall be provided
in accordance with 40 CFR 1503.3.
Appendix A to Part 200: Categorical
Exclusions
A.1 Purpose
The purpose of Categorical Exclusions
(CATEXs) is to limit extensive NEPA analysis
to those actions that may be major Federal
actions significantly affecting the quality of
the human environment, thus saving time,
effort, and taxpayer dollars.
A.2 Definition
An action is categorically excluded from
the requirement to prepare an EA or an EIS
if it meets the following definition:
‘‘Categorical exclusion’’ means a category
of actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment and which have been
found to have no such effect in procedures
adopted by a Federal agency in
implementation of these regulations and for
which, therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required. An agency may decide
in its procedures or otherwise, to prepare
environmental assessments for the reasons
stated in § 1508.9 even though it is not
required to do so. Any procedures under this
section shall provide for extraordinary
circumstances in which a normally excluded
action may have a significant environmental
effect. (40 CFR 1508.4)
AFRH has identified two types of CATEXs:
(1) The CATEX, which does not require
documentation and requires completion of an
environmental checklist.
A.3 CATEXs—Requires No Documentation
The following CATEXs require no
documentation.
A.3(a) Granting a lease (i.e., outlease), an
easement, license, permit (i.e., licenses to
Federal entities), or other arrangements for
Federal or non-Federal use of AFRH
controlled real property, where such use will
remain substantially the same in scope and
intensity.
A.3(b) Extensions or renewals of leases,
licenses or permits (i.e., licenses to Federal
entities) or succeeding leases, easements,
licenses or permits whether AFRH is acting
as grantor or grantee and there is no change
in use of the facility.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 165 / Thursday, August 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
A.3(c) Repair and alteration projects
involving, but not adversely affecting,
properties listed on or eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places.
A.3(d) Repair to or replacement in kind of
equipment or components in AFRHcontrolled facilities without change in
location, e.g. HVAC, electrical distribution
systems, windows, doors or roof.
A.3(e) Disposal or other disposition of
claimed or unclaimed personal property of
deceased persons.
A.3(f) Supportive services that include
health care and housing services, permanent
housing placement, day care, nutritional
services, collection of payment for services,
short-term payments for rent/mortgage/utility
costs, and assistance in gaining access to
local, State, and Federal government benefits
and services.
A.3(g) Normal personnel, fiscal, and
administrative activities involving civilian
personnel (recruiting, processing, paying,
and records keeping).
A.3(h) Routine or minor facility
maintenance, custodial, and groundskeeping
activities such as window washing, lawn
mowing, trash collecting, and snow removal
that do not involve environmentally sensitive
areas (such as eroded areas, wetlands,
cultural sites, or areas with endangered/
threatened species).
A.3(i) Environmental Site Assessment
activities under RCRA and CERCLA;
A.3(j) Geological, geophysical,
geochemical, and engineering surveys and
mapping, including the establishment of
survey marks;
A.3(k) Installation and operation of
ambient air and noise monitoring equipment
that does not include constructing or erecting
towers;
A.3(l) Routine procurement of goods and
services (complying with applicable
procedures for sustainable or ‘‘green’’
procurement) to support operations and
infrastructure, including routine utility
services and contracts.
A.3(m) Routine movement/relocations of
residents on site.
A.4 CATEXs Requiring Documentation
The following are categorical exclusions
that require preparation of a checklist to
ensure that no extraordinary circumstances
exist that would require preparation of an EA
or EIS. Checklists may be obtained from the
Master Planner at 3700 North Capitol Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20011.
A.4(a) Expansion or improvement of an
existing facility where all of the following
conditions are met:
A.4(a)(1) The structure and proposed use
are substantially in compliance with local
planning and zoning and any applicable
State or Federal requirements;
A.4(a)(2) The proposed use will only
slightly increase the number of motor
vehicles at the facility;
A.4(a)(3) The site and the scale of
construction are consistent with those of
existing adjacent or nearby buildings; and
A.4(a)(4) There is no evidence of
environmental controversy.
A.4(b) Transfer or disposal of real
property to State or local agencies for
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:24 Aug 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
preservation or protection of wildlife
conservation and historic monument
purposes.
A.4(c) Disposal of fixtures, related
personal property, demountable structures,
and transmission lines in accordance with
management requirements.
A.4(d) Disposal of properties where the
size, area, topography, and zoning are similar
to existing surrounding properties and/or
where current and reasonable anticipated
uses are or would be similar to current
surrounding uses (e.g., commercial store in a
commercial strip, warehouse in an urban
complex, office building in downtown area,
row house or vacant lot in an urban area).
A.4(e) Demolition, removal and disposal
of debris from the demolition or
improvement of buildings and other
structures neither on nor eligible for listing
on the National Register of Historic Places
and when under applicable regulations (i.e.,
removal of asbestos, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), and other hazardous
material) when other environmental laws and
regulations will be satisfied prior to
demolition, removal and disposal.
A.4(f) Relocations and realignments of
employees and/or residents from one
geographic area to another that: Fall below
the thresholds for reportable actions and do
not involve related activities such as
construction, renovation, or demolition
activities that would otherwise require an EA
or an EIS to impellent. This includes
reorganization and reassignments with no
changes in employee and/or resident status,
and routine administrative reorganizations
and consolidations.
Appendix B to Part 200: The Action
Requiring an Environmental
Assessment
The following actions are not considered to
be major Federal actions significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment and; therefore, require an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) nor
are considered a categorical exclusion as
defined in these regulations and would
require the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment (EA):
B.1 Construction on previously disturbed
property where there is the potential for a
increase in traffic and people.
Appendix C to Part 200: Actions
Requiring Environmental Impact
Statement
The following actions are considered to be
major Federal actions significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment, and
therefore must be the subjects of EIS, as
indicates may have significant environmental
effects:
C.1 Acquisition of space by Federal
construction or lease construction, or
expansion or improvement of an existing
facility, where one or more of the following
applies:
C.1(a) The structure and/or proposed use
are not substantially consistent with local
planning and zoning or any applicable State
or Federal requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43653
C.1(b) The proposed use will
substantially increase the number of motor
vehicles at the facility.
C.1(c) The site and scale of construction
are not consistent with those of existing
adjacent or nearby buildings.
C.1(d) There is evidence of current or
potential environmental controversy.
C.2 Space acquisition programs projected
for a substantial geographical area (e.g., a
metropolitan area) for a 3-to-5-year period or
greater (Note: A Programmatic EIS is often
appropriate here, from which subsequent
EISs and EAs can be tiered).
Dated: August 21, 2009.
Timothy Cox,
Chief Operating Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–20674 Filed 8–26–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8250–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0547; FRL–8950–4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West
Virginia; Determination of Clean Data
for the 1997 Fine Particulate Matter
Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
SUMMARY: This document corrects an
omission in the preamble language of
the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPR) to determine that the West
Virginia portions of three nonattainment
areas for the 1997 fine particulate
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS) have clean data for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 31, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2009–0547 by one of the
following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail:
fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0547,
Cristina Fernandez, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously
listed EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 165 (Thursday, August 27, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43649-43653]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20674]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME
38 CFR Part 200
[Docket No. AFRH 2009-01]
RIN 3030-ZA00
Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act
AGENCY: Armed Forces Retirement Home.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) proposes regulations
establishing policy and assigning responsibilities for implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, related laws,
executive orders, and regulations in the decision-making process of the
AFRH. These regulations were developed to comply with Section 103 of 42
U.S.C. 4321.
DATES: Submit comments on or before October 1, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by AFRH 2009-01, by any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Timothy Cox, COO, AFRH, 3700 N. Capitol St., NW.,
P.O. Box 1303, Washington, DC 20011-8400.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Timothy Cox, COO, AFRH, 3700 N.
Capitol St., NW., Washington, DC 20011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Woo, Master Planner, (202) 730-
3445.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposed rule is not a major rule for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, AFRH certifies that this proposed rule will not have a
significant impact on small business entities.
This proposed rule will set out environmental policy for the Armed
Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) and provide direction for carrying out
the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.
These regulations were developed to comply with Section 103 of 42
U.S.C. 4321.
Electronic Access and Filing
You may submit comments by sending electronic mail (E-mail) to:
Tim.Sheckler@gsa.gov. Include RIN number in the subject line of the
message. You may also fax comments to 202-205-5295, Attn: Mr. Tim
Scheckler.
Instructions
All submissions received must include the agency name and document
number for this rulemaking.
Docket
For access to the docket to read background documents or comments
received, go to 3700 North Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC 20011.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 200
Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Armed Forces Retirement
Home (AFRH) proposes to amend 38 CFR Chapter II by adding Part 200 to
read as follows:
PART 200--COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
Sec.
200.1 Purpose.
200.2 Background.
200.3 Responsibilities.
200.4 Implementation of NEPA and related authorities.
200.5 Coordination with other authorities.
200.6 Public involvement.
[[Page 43650]]
200.7 Cooperating agencies.
200.8 AFRH participation in NEPA compliance by other agencies.
Appendix A to Part 200--Categorical Exclusions
Appendix B to Part 200--The Action Requiring an Environmental
Assessment
Appendix C to Part 200--Actions Requiring Environmental Impact
Statement
Authority: 24 U.S.C. 401, et seq.
Sec. 200.1 Purpose.
These regulations set out AFRH environmental policy and provide
direction for carrying out the procedural requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and related legal authorities.
Sec. 200.2 Background.
(a) The NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations
implementing the procedural requirements of NEPA (40 CFR 1500 through
1508, hereinafter, the CEQ regulations) require that each Federal
agency consider the impact of its actions on the human environment and
prescribe procedures to be followed. Other laws, executive orders, and
regulations provide related direction. NEPA establishes and AFRH adopts
as policy that as a Federal agency, AFRH will: Use all practicable
means, consistent with other essential considerations of national
policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs,
and resources to the end that the Nation may:
(1) Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of
the environment for succeeding generations;
(2) Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and
esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(3) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment
without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and
unintended consequences;
(4) Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of
our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment
which supports diversity, and variety of individual choice;
(5) Achieve a balance between population and resource use which
will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's
amenities; and
(6) Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the
maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources.
(b) As an important means of carrying out this policy, AFRH will
analyze and consider the impacts of its proposed actions (activities,
programs, projects, legislation) and any reasonable alternatives on the
environment, and on the relationship of people with the environment.
This analysis is to be undertaken early in planning any such action, as
an aid to deciding whether the action will go forward, and if so how.
Consideration must be given to reasonable alternative means of
achieving the purpose and need for the proposed action, and to the
alternative of not taking the proposed action. The analysis is to be
completed, and used to inform the decision maker and make the public
aware of the action's potential impacts, before the decision is made
about whether and how to proceed with the action. Relevant
environmental documents, comments, and responses regarding the proposal
will accompany the proposal and be presented to the AFRH decision maker
for their consideration.
(c) NEPA also requires and AFRH will ensure that, to the fullest
extent possible, analyses and consultations required by other
environmental laws be coordinated with those required under NEPA, to
reduce redundancy, paperwork, time, and cost.
(d) The AFRH is an independent Federal agency that provides
residence and related services for certain retired and former members
of the Armed Forces. The AFRH has property in Washington, DC and
Gulfport, MS.
(e) This part contains AFRH's general policy regarding NEPA
implementation and sets out AFRH procedures that supplement the CEQ
regulations for meeting NEPA requirements. It also assigns
responsibilities to the Chief Operating Officer (COO) for the AFRH and
the Master Planner. These regulations provide further detail regarding
the conduct of NEPA impact analyses.
Sec. 200.3 Responsibilities.
(a) The COO is the AFRH NEPA official responsible for compliance
with NEPA for AFRH actions. The COO also provides the AFRH's views on
other agencies' environmental impact statements (EIS).
(b) The Master Planner is the point of contact for information on:
AFRH NEPA documents; NEPA oversight activities; and review of other
agencies' EISs and NEPA documents.
(c) The AFRH's assigned counsel is the point of contact for legal
questions involving environmental matters.
Sec. 200.4 Implementation of NEPA and related authorities.
(a) Classification of AFRH actions. (1) All AFRH proposed actions
typically fall into one of the following three classes, in terms of
requirements for review under NEPA: Categorical exclusions,
environmental assessments, and environmental impact statements.
(2) The Master Planner, is responsible for classifying proposed
actions and undertaking the level of analysis, consultation, and review
appropriate to each.
(b) Categorical Exclusions (CATEX). (1) A categorical exclusion
(CATEX) is a category of actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, except
under extraordinary circumstances (42 CFR 1508.4). Because they lack
the potential for effect, they do not require detailed analysis or
documentation under NEPA.
(i) Determining when to use a CATEX (screening criteria). To use a
CATEX, the proponent must satisfy the following three screening
conditions:
(A) The action has not been segmented. Determine that the action
has not been segmented to meet the definition of a CATEX. 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.
(B) No exceptional circumstances exist. Determine if the action
involves extraordinary circumstances that would preclude the use of a
CATEX (see 4(b)(1)(ii)(A) through (xiv) of this section).
(C) One (or more) CATEX (See Appendix A to Part 200) encompasses
the proposed action. Identify a CATEX (or multiple CATEXs) that
potentially encompasses the proposed action. If no CATEX 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.
(ii) Extraordinary circumstances that preclude the use of a CATEX
are:
(A) Reasonable likelihood of significant effects on public health,
safety, or the environment.
(B) Reasonable likelihood of significant environmental effects
(direct, indirect, and cumulative).
(C) Imposition of uncertain or unique environmental risks.
(D) Greater scope or size than is normal for this category of
action.
(E) Reportable releases of hazardous or toxic substances as
specified in 40 CFR part 302.
(F) Releases of petroleum, oils, and lubricants, application of
pesticides and herbicides, or where the proposed
[[Page 43651]]
action results in the requirement to develop or amend a Spill
Prevention, Control, or Countermeasures Plan.
(G) When a review of an action reveals that air emissions exceed de
minimis levels or otherwise that a formal Clean Air Act conformity
determination is required.
(H) Reasonable likelihood of violating any Federal, State, or local
law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment.
(I) Unresolved effect on environmentally sensitive resources, as
defined in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section.
(J) Involving effects on the quality of the environment that are
likely to be highly controversial.
(K) Involving effects on the environment that are highly uncertain,
involve unique or unknown risks, or are scientifically controversial.
(L) Establishes a precedent (or makes decisions in principle) for
future or subsequent actions that are reasonably likely to have a
future significant effect.
(M) 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.
(N) Introduction/employment of unproven technology.
(iii) 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 CATEX
cannot be used. Environmentally sensitive resources include:
(A) Listed or proposed Federally listed, threatened, or endangered
species or their designated or proposed critical habitats.
(B) Properties listed or eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places.
(C) 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.
(iv) The use of a CATEX 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 CATEX screening
criteria.
(v) For those CATEXs that require documentation, a brief (one to
two sentences) presentation of conclusions reached during screening
should be included with the checklist. Checklists may be obtained from
the Master Planner at 3700 North Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC
20011.
(2) AFRH recognizes two types of CATEX:
(i) CATEX--does not require documentation unless the Master Planner
determines that an extraordinary circumstance may exist, whereupon a
CATEX--requires documentation that must be prepared (see below). The
likelihood of such a circumstance is judged to be so low that no
specific environmental document is typically required.
(ii) CATEX--requires documentation that involves a cursory review
to ensure that no extraordinary circumstances exist. For an action
falling into such a category, a CATEX requiring documentation is
completed to support a determination by the Master Planner, as to
whether the action needs further review under NEPA. A CATEX
documentation is developed and maintained by the Master Planner.
(3) CATEXs requiring and not requiring documentation are listed in
Appendix A of these regulations.
(c) Environmental Assessment (EA). (1) An Environmental Assessment
(EA) is a concise public document prepared by or on behalf of AFRH that
assists AFRH in deciding whether or not there may be significant
effects requiring a more detailed Environmental Impact Statement.
Actions typically requiring preparation of an EA are found in Appendix
B to Part 200.
(2) The analysis required for an EA leads either to a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) or a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement. AFRH will prepare a FONSI in accordance
with 40 CFR 1508.13, if the agency determines on the basis of the EA
that there are no significant environmental effects and therefore,
there is no need to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. AFRH
shall make the FONSI available to the affected public as specified in
Sec. 1506.6. Under certain limited circumstances, AFRH shall make the
finding of no significant impact available for public review for 30
days before the agency makes its final determination whether to prepare
an environmental impact statement and before the action may begin. The
circumstances are:
(i) The proposed action is, or is closely similar to, one which
normally requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement;
(ii) The nature of the proposed action is one without precedent; or
(iii) There is controversy associated with the environmental
effects of the proposed action.
(d) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). (1) An Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) is a detailed analysis and report, that presents
the environmental effects of a proposed action and its reasonable
alternatives. An EIS is prepared for any AFRH action that may have
significant effects on the quality of the human environment. A Notice
of Intent will be prepared and published in the Federal Register as
soon as practicable after deciding to prepare an EIS. When a lengthy
period of time will elapse between the decision to prepare the EIS and
preparation of the EIS, the notice of intent should be published at a
reasonable time prior to preparing the EIS.
(2) Certain AFRH actions are likely to have significant effects on
the quality of the human environment, and hence typically require an
EIS. These classes of action are listed in Appendix C to Part 200.
(3) When it appears that the action is likely to have significant
effects on the quality of the human environment, AFRH will prepare an
EIS. An action that typically requires an EIS is found in Appendix C to
Part 200. An EA may be prepared to aid in deciding whether an EIS is
needed, or the responsible official may decide to prepare an EIS
without preparing an EA.
(4) Direction for preparing, circulating, finalizing, and using an
EIS in decision making is found in the CEQ Regulations (40 CFR parts
1500 through 1508).
(e) Supplemental statements. If an EA or an EIS has been completed
and the AFRH goes to implement the action, but no action has been taken
within four years of the completion of the EA or EIS, the AFRH will
review the document to determine if circumstances have changed that
would warrant a supplement to the original document. A supplemental
statement will be provided to the decision maker to inform the
decisions on whether and how to proceed with the proposed action and be
maintained with the previous EA or EIS and related records for the
proposed action.
(f) Using NEPA in decision making. (1) Compliance with NEPA and
related authorities will begin at the earliest point in planning any
action, when the
[[Page 43652]]
widest reasonable range of alternatives is open for consideration.
(2) The NEPA review process will be carried out in coordination
with continued planning.
(3) All personnel involved in planning actions should view NEPA
review as part of effective planning, not as a mere documentation
requirement.
(4) Outside agencies, State and local governments, Indian Tribes,
and the public will whenever practicable be afforded reasonable
opportunities to participate in the NEPA process.
(5) The results of NEPA review will be fully considered by each
AFRH decision-maker before making a decision on an action subject to
such review and the alternatives considered by the decision-maker will
be encompassed within the range of alternatives for the action.
(6) AFRH will ensure relevant environmental documents, comments,
and responses are part of the record in formal rulemaking or
adjudicatory proceedings.
(7) Executives and other employees responsible for aspects of NEPA
review will be held accountable for the performance of such
responsibilities, through performance reviews and other administrative
mechanisms.
Sec. 200.5 Coordination with other authorities.
(a) To the maximum extent feasible, NEPA review shall be
coordinated with review of proposed actions under other environmental
legal authorities, including but not limited to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA); the Endangered Species Act
(ESA); Executive Orders 11988, 11990, and 13006; and other applicable
authorities.
(b) In effecting such coordination, responsible AFRH officials will
ensure that the substantive and procedural requirements of other
environmental authorities are met, together with the requirements of
NEPA. It will be explicitly understood that compliance with NEPA does
not substitute for compliance with other environmental authorities, nor
does compliance with such other authority substitute for compliance
with NEPA.
Sec. 200.6 Public involvement.
(a) As part of its system for NEPA compliance, the COO and the
Master Planner shall provide for levels and kinds of public involvement
appropriate to the proposed action and its likely effects.
(b) Where a related authority provides specific procedures for
public involvement, the responsible AFRH official shall ensure that
such procedures where practicable in the process of NEPA review.
(c) Public involvement in the AFRH NEPA process shall have as its
purpose the full disclosure of AFRH actions and alternatives to the
public, within the constraints of AFRH program authorities, and giving
the public a full opportunity to comment on the environmental effects
of AFRH proposals.
(d) Pursuant to Executive Order 12898, special efforts will be made
to involve members of potentially affected low-income and minority
communities in NEPA review and decision-making. Such efforts may
include, but are not limited to, special programs of community
outreach, including cross-cultural programs, translations of pertinent
documents, and ensuring that translators are available at public
meetings.
(e) Information pertaining to AFRH actions and/or NEPA
documentation can be obtained through the Master Planner at 3700 North
Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC 20011.
Sec. 200.7 Cooperating agencies.
(a) Federal agencies with jurisdiction by law will be invited to
serve as cooperating agencies and Federal agencies with special
expertise may be invited to serve as cooperating agencies in the
conduct of NEPA review of an AFRH proposed action.
(b) The responsible AFRH official will invite other Tribal, State,
and local agencies to serve as cooperating agencies with subject matter
jurisdiction or special expertise in the conduct of NEPA review of an
AFRH proposed action.
Sec. 200.8 AFRH participation in NEPA compliance by other agencies.
(a) AFRH may participate in the NEPA process as a cooperating
agency for another lead agency's project, or as a commenter/reviewer of
another agency's NEPA document. AFRH may also participate in
environmental studies carried out by non-Federal parties (for example,
a local government conducting studies under a State environmental
policy law) where such studies are relevant to AFRH's interests or may
be incorporated by AFRH into its own studies under NEPA. Where AFRH
will be responsible for a decision on a project that is the subject of
such a study, and has the authority to do so, AFRH will ensure that the
study and its resulting documents meet the standards set forth in these
regulations in coordination with the COO.
(b) As a cooperating agency, AFRH participates in the NEPA process
as requested by the lead agency, in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.6 of
the CEQ regulations. Tasks may include participating in meetings and
providing specific information relevant to the matters over which it
has jurisdiction by law or expertise.
(c) AFRH comments shall be prepared in consultation with, or by,
the Master Planner.
(d) The responsible AFRH official may provide comments and/or
reviews of another agency's NEPA documents, and/or other Federal and
State environmental documents.
(e) AFRH comments shall be provided in accordance with 40 CFR
1503.3.
Appendix A to Part 200: Categorical Exclusions
A.1 Purpose
The purpose of Categorical Exclusions (CATEXs) is to limit
extensive NEPA analysis to those actions that may be major Federal
actions significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment, thus saving time, effort, and taxpayer dollars.
A.2 Definition
An action is categorically excluded from the requirement to
prepare an EA or an EIS if it meets the following definition:
``Categorical exclusion'' means a category of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment and which have been found to have no such effect
in procedures adopted by a Federal agency in implementation of these
regulations and for which, therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. An
agency may decide in its procedures or otherwise, to prepare
environmental assessments for the reasons stated in Sec. 1508.9
even though it is not required to do so. Any procedures under this
section shall provide for extraordinary circumstances in which a
normally excluded action may have a significant environmental
effect. (40 CFR 1508.4)
AFRH has identified two types of CATEXs: (1) The CATEX, which
does not require documentation and requires completion of an
environmental checklist.
A.3 CATEXs--Requires No Documentation
The following CATEXs require no documentation.
A.3(a) Granting a lease (i.e., outlease), an easement, license,
permit (i.e., licenses to Federal entities), or other arrangements
for Federal or non-Federal use of AFRH controlled real property,
where such use will remain substantially the same in scope and
intensity.
A.3(b) Extensions or renewals of leases, licenses or permits
(i.e., licenses to Federal entities) or succeeding leases,
easements, licenses or permits whether AFRH is acting as grantor or
grantee and there is no change in use of the facility.
[[Page 43653]]
A.3(c) Repair and alteration projects involving, but not
adversely affecting, properties listed on or eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places.
A.3(d) Repair to or replacement in kind of equipment or
components in AFRH-controlled facilities without change in location,
e.g. HVAC, electrical distribution systems, windows, doors or roof.
A.3(e) Disposal or other disposition of claimed or unclaimed
personal property of deceased persons.
A.3(f) Supportive services that include health care and housing
services, permanent housing placement, day care, nutritional
services, collection of payment for services, short-term payments
for rent/mortgage/utility costs, and assistance in gaining access to
local, State, and Federal government benefits and services.
A.3(g) Normal personnel, fiscal, and administrative activities
involving civilian personnel (recruiting, processing, paying, and
records keeping).
A.3(h) Routine or minor facility maintenance, custodial, and
groundskeeping activities such as window washing, lawn mowing, trash
collecting, and snow removal that do not involve environmentally
sensitive areas (such as eroded areas, wetlands, cultural sites, or
areas with endangered/threatened species).
A.3(i) Environmental Site Assessment activities under RCRA and
CERCLA;
A.3(j) Geological, geophysical, geochemical, and engineering
surveys and mapping, including the establishment of survey marks;
A.3(k) Installation and operation of ambient air and noise
monitoring equipment that does not include constructing or erecting
towers;
A.3(l) Routine procurement of goods and services (complying with
applicable procedures for sustainable or ``green'' procurement) to
support operations and infrastructure, including routine utility
services and contracts.
A.3(m) Routine movement/relocations of residents on site.
A.4 CATEXs Requiring Documentation
The following are categorical exclusions that require
preparation of a checklist to ensure that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that would require preparation of an EA or EIS.
Checklists may be obtained from the Master Planner at 3700 North
Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC 20011.
A.4(a) Expansion or improvement of an existing facility where
all of the following conditions are met:
A.4(a)(1) The structure and proposed use are substantially in
compliance with local planning and zoning and any applicable State
or Federal requirements;
A.4(a)(2) The proposed use will only slightly increase the
number of motor vehicles at the facility;
A.4(a)(3) The site and the scale of construction are consistent
with those of existing adjacent or nearby buildings; and
A.4(a)(4) There is no evidence of environmental controversy.
A.4(b) Transfer or disposal of real property to State or local
agencies for preservation or protection of wildlife conservation and
historic monument purposes.
A.4(c) Disposal of fixtures, related personal property,
demountable structures, and transmission lines in accordance with
management requirements.
A.4(d) Disposal of properties where the size, area, topography,
and zoning are similar to existing surrounding properties and/or
where current and reasonable anticipated uses are or would be
similar to current surrounding uses (e.g., commercial store in a
commercial strip, warehouse in an urban complex, office building in
downtown area, row house or vacant lot in an urban area).
A.4(e) Demolition, removal and disposal of debris from the
demolition or improvement of buildings and other structures neither
on nor eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places and when under applicable regulations (i.e., removal of
asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and other hazardous
material) when other environmental laws and regulations will be
satisfied prior to demolition, removal and disposal.
A.4(f) Relocations and realignments of employees and/or
residents from one geographic area to another that: Fall below the
thresholds for reportable actions and do not involve related
activities such as construction, renovation, or demolition
activities that would otherwise require an EA or an EIS to
impellent. This includes reorganization and reassignments with no
changes in employee and/or resident status, and routine
administrative reorganizations and consolidations.
Appendix B to Part 200: The Action Requiring an Environmental
Assessment
The following actions are not considered to be major Federal
actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment
and; therefore, require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) nor
are considered a categorical exclusion as defined in these
regulations and would require the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment (EA):
B.1 Construction on previously disturbed property where there is
the potential for a increase in traffic and people.
Appendix C to Part 200: Actions Requiring Environmental Impact
Statement
The following actions are considered to be major Federal actions
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, and
therefore must be the subjects of EIS, as indicates may have
significant environmental effects:
C.1 Acquisition of space by Federal construction or lease
construction, or expansion or improvement of an existing facility,
where one or more of the following applies:
C.1(a) The structure and/or proposed use are not substantially
consistent with local planning and zoning or any applicable State or
Federal requirements.
C.1(b) The proposed use will substantially increase the number
of motor vehicles at the facility.
C.1(c) The site and scale of construction are not consistent
with those of existing adjacent or nearby buildings.
C.1(d) There is evidence of current or potential environmental
controversy.
C.2 Space acquisition programs projected for a substantial
geographical area (e.g., a metropolitan area) for a 3-to-5-year
period or greater (Note: A Programmatic EIS is often appropriate
here, from which subsequent EISs and EAs can be tiered).
Dated: August 21, 2009.
Timothy Cox,
Chief Operating Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-20674 Filed 8-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8250-01-P