OEA, before taking such action. If the Assistant Administrator, OEA, determines such a deviation would be in the best interest of the Government, he shall inform the responsible official, as soon as possible, of his approval.

(3) The Assistant Administrator, OEA, shall coordinate his action on a deviation under §6.106(b) (1) or (2) of this part with the Director, Grants Administration Division, Office of Planning and Management, for any required grant-related deviation under 40 CFR 30.1000, as well as the appropriate Assistant Administrator.

[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 9829, Mar. 8, 1982]

§6.107 Categorical exclusions.

(a) General. Categories of actions which do not individually, cumulatively over time, or in conjunction with other Federal, State, local, or private actions have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment and which have been identified as having no such effect based on the requirements in §6.505, may be exempted from the substantive environmental review requirements of this part. Environmental information documents and environmental assessments or environmental impact statements will not be required for excluded actions.

(b) Determination. The responsible official shall determine whether an action is eligible for a categorical exclusion as established by general criteria in §6.107 (d) and (e) and any applicable criteria in program specific subparts of part 6 of this title. A determination shall be made as early as possible following the receipt of an application. The responsible official shall document the decision to issue or deny an exclusion as soon as practicable following review in accordance with §6.400(f). For qualified actions, the documentation shall include the application, a brief description of the proposed action, and a brief statement of how the action meets the criteria for a categorical exclusion without violating criteria for not granting an exclusion.

(c) Revocation. The responsible official shall revoke a categorical exclusion and shall require a full environmental review if, subsequent to the granting of an exclusion, the respon

sible official determines that: (1) The proposed action no longer meets the requirements for a categorical exclusion due to changes in the proposed action; or (2) determines from new evidence that serious local or environmental issues exist; or (3) that Federal, State, local, or tribal laws are being or may be violated.

(d) General categories of actions eligible for exclusion. Actions consistent with any of the following categories are eligible for a categorical exclusion:

(1) Actions which are solely directed toward minor rehabilitation of existing facilities, functional replacement of equipment, or towards the construction of new ancillary facilities adjacent or appurtenant to existing facilities;

(2) Other actions specifically allowed in program specific subparts of this regulation; or

(3) Other actions developed in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section. (e) General criteria for not granting a categorical exclusion. (1) The full environmental review procedures of this part must be followed if undertaking an action consistent with allowable categories in paragraph (d) of this section may involve serious local or environmental issues, or meets any of the criteria listed below:

(i) The action is known or expected to have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment, either individually, cumulatively over time, or in conjunction with other Federal, State, local, tribal or private actions;

(ii) The action is known or expected to directly or indirectly affect:

(A) Cultural resource areas such as archaeological and historic sites in accordance with §6.301,

(B) Endangered or threatened species and their critical habitats in accordance with §6.302 or State lists,

(C) Environmentally important natural resource areas such as floodplains, wetlands, important farmlands, aquifer recharge zones in accordance with §6.302, or

(D) Other resource areas identified in supplemental guidance issued by the OEA;

(iii) The action is known or expected not to be cost-effective or to cause significant public controversy; or

(iv) Appropriate specialized program specific criteria for not granting an exclusion found in other subparts of this regulation are applicable to the action.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (d) of this section, if any of the conditions cited in paragraph (e)(1) of this section exist, the responsible official shall ensure:

(i) That a categorical exclusion is not granted or, if previously granted, that it is revoked according to paragraph (c) of this section;

(ii) That an adequate EID is prepared; and

(iii) That either an environmental assessment and FNSI or a notice of intent for an EIS and ROD is prepared and issued.

(f) Developing new categories of excluded actions. The responsible official, or other interested parties, may request that a new general or specialized program specific category of excluded actions be created, or that an existing category be amended or deleted. The request shall be in writing to the Assistant Administrator, OEA, and shall contain adequate information to support the request. Proposed new categories shall be developed by OEA and published in the FEDERAL REGISTER as a proposed rule, amending paragraph (d) of this section when the proposed new category applies to all eligible programs or, amending appropriate paragraphs in other subparts of this part when the proposed new category applies to one specific program. The publication shall include a thirty (30) day public comment period. In addition to criteria for specific programs listed in other subparts of this part, the following general criteria shall be considered in evaluating proposals for new categories:

(1) Any action taken seldom results in the effects identified in general or specialized program specific criteria identified through the application of criteria for not granting a categorical exclusion;

(2) Based upon previous environmental reviews, actions consistent with the proposed category have not required the preparation of an EIS; and

(3) Whether information adequate to determine if a potential action is con

sistent with the proposed category will normally be available when needed.

[50 FR 26315, June 25, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 32610, Sept. 12, 1986]

§6.108 Criteria for initiating an EIS.

The responsible official shall assure that an EIS will be prepared and issued for actions under subparts E, G, H, and I when it is determined that any of the following conditions exist:

(a) The Federal action may significantly affect the pattern and type of land use (industrial, commercial, agricultural, recreational, residential) or growth and distribution of population;

(b) The effects resulting from any structure or facility constructed or operated under the proposed action may conflict with local, regional or State land use plans or policies;

(c) The proposed action may have significant adverse effects on wetlands, including indirect and cumulative effects, or any major part of a structure or facility constructed or operated under the proposed action may be located in wetlands;

(d) The proposed action may significantly affect threatened and endangered species or their habitats identified in the Department of the Interior's list, in accordance with §6.302, or a State's list, or a structure or a facility constructed or operated under the proposed action may be located in the habitat;

(e) Implementation of the proposed action or plan may directly cause or induce changes that significantly:

(1) Displace population;

(2) Alter the character of existing residential areas;

(3) Adversely affect a floodplain; or (4) Adversely affect significant amounts of important farmlands as defined in requirements in §6.302(c), or agricultural operations on this land.

(f) The proposed action may, directly, indirectly or cumulatively have significant adverse effect on parklands, preserves, other public lands or areas of recognized scenic, recreational, archaeological, or historic value; or

(g) The Federal action may directly or through induced development have a significant adverse effect upon local ambient air quality, local ambient

§6.202 Executive summary.

The executive summary shall describe in sufficient detail (10-15 pages) the critical facets of the EIS so that the reader can become familiar with the proposed project or action and its net effects. The executive summary shall focus on:

(a) The existing problem;

(b) A brief description of each alternative evaluated (including the preferred and no action alternatives) along with a listing of the environmental impacts, possible mitigation measures relating to each alternative, and any areas of controversy (including

issues raised by governmental agencies and the public); and

(c) Any major conclusions.

A comprehensive summary may be prepared in instances where the EIS is unusually long in nature. In accordance with 40 CFR 1502.19, the comprehensive summary may be circulated in lieu of the EIS; however, both documents shall be distributed to any Federal State and local agencies who have EIS review responsibilities and also shall be made available to other interested parties upon request.

§6.203 Body of EISS.

(a) Purpose and need. The EIS shall clearly specify the underlying purpose and need to which EPA is responding If the action is a request for a permit or a grant, the EIS shall clearly specify the goals and objectives of the applicant.

(b) Alternatives including the proposed action. In addition to 40 CFR 1502.14, the EIS shall discuss:

(1) Alternatives considered by the applicant. This section shall include a balanced description of each alternative considered by the applicant. These discussions shall include size and location of facilities, land requirements, operation and maintenance requirements, auxiliary structures such as pipelines or transmission lines, and construction schedules. The alternative of no action shall be discussed and the applicant's preferred alternative(s) shall be identified. For alternatives which were eliminated from detailed study, a brief discussion of the reasons for their having been eliminated shall be included.

(2) Alternatives available to EPA. EPA alternatives to be discussed shall include: (i) Taking an action; or (ii) taking an action on a modified or alternative project, including an action not considered by the applicant; and (iii) denying the action.

(3) Alternatives available to other permitting agencies. When preparing a joint EIS, and if applicable, the alternatives available to other Federal and/or State agencies shall be discussed.

(4) Identifying preferred alternative. In the final EIS, the responsible official shall signify the preferred alternative.

(c) Affected environment and environmental consequences of the alternatives.

The affected environment on which the evaluation of each alternative shall be based includes, for example, hydrology, geology, air quality, noise, biology, socioeconomics, energy, land use, and archeology and historic subjects. The discussion shall be structured so as to present the total impacts of each alternative for easy comparison among all alternatives by the reader. The effects of a "no action" alternative should be included to facilitate reader comparison of the beneficial and adverse impacts of other alternatives to the applicant doing nothing. A description of the environmental setting shall be included in the "no action" alternative for the purpose of providing needed background information. The amount of detail in describing the affected environment shall be commensurate with the complexity of the situation and the importance of the anticipated impacts. (d) Coordination. The EIS shall include:

(1) The objections and suggestions made by local, State, and Federal agencies before and during the EIS review process must be given full consideration, along with the issues of public concern expressed by individual citizens and interested environmental groups. The EIS must include discussions of any such comments concerning our actions, and the author of each comment should be identified. If a comment has resulted in a change in the project or the EIS, the impact statement should explain the reason.

(2) Public participation through public hearings or scoping meetings shall also be included. If a public hearing has been held prior to the publication of the EIS, a summary of the transcript should be included in this section. For the public hearing which shall be held after the publication of the draft EIS, the date, time, place, and purpose shall be included here.

(3) In the final EIS, a summary of the coordination process and EPA responses to comments on the draft EIS shall be included.

[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25, 1985]

$6.204 Incorporation by reference.

In addition to 40 CFR 1502.21, material incorporated into an EIS by ref

erence shall be organized to the extent possible into a Supplemental Information Document and be made available for review upon request. No material may be incorporated by reference unless it is reasonably available for inspection by potentially interested persons within the period allowed for comment.

§6.205 List of preparers.

When the EIS is prepared by contract, either under direct contract to EPA or through an applicant's or grantee's contractor, the responsible official must independently evaluate the EIS prior to its approval and take responsibility for its scope and contents. The EPA officials who undertake this evaluation shall also be described under the list of preparers.

Subpart C-Coordination With

Other Environmental Review and Consultation Requirements

$6.300 General.

Various Federal laws and executive orders address specific environmental concerns. The responsible official shall integrate to the greatest practicable extent the applicable procedures in this subpart during the implementation of the environmental review process under subparts E through I. This subpart presents the central requirements of these laws and executive orders. It refers to the pertinent authority and regulations or guidance that contain the procedures. These laws and executive orders establish review procedures independent of NEPA requirements. The responsible official shall be familiar with any other EPA or appropriate agency procedures implementing these laws and executive orders.

[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25, 1985]

§6.301 Landmarks, historical, and archeological sites.

EPA is subject to the requirements of the Historic Sites Act of 1935, 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq., the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq., the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974,

16 U.S.C. 469 et seq., and Executive Order 11593, entitled "Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment." These statutes, regulations and executive orders establish review procedures independent of NEPA requirements.

(a) National natural landmarks. Under the Historic Sites Act of 1935, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to designate areas as national natural landmarks for listing on the National Registry of Natural Landmarks. In conducting an environmental review of a proposed EPA action, the responsible official shall consider the existence and location of natural landmarks using information provided by the National Park Service pursuant to 36 CFR 62.6(d) to avoid undesirable impacts upon such landmarks.

Historic,

architectural,

archeo

(b) logical, and cultural sites. Under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Executive Order 11593, if an EPA undertaking affects any property with historic, architectural, archeological or cultural value that is listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the responsible official shall comply with the procedures for consultation and comment promulgated by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in 36 CFR part 800. The responsible official must identify properties affected by the undertaking that are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register and shall request a determination of eligibility from the Keeper of the National Register, Department of the Interior, under the procedures in 36 CFR part 63.

(c) Historic, prehistoric and archeological data. Under the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act, if an EPA activity may cause irreparable loss or destruction of significant scientific, prehistoric, historic or archeological data, the responsible official or the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to undertake data recovery and preservation activities. Data recovery and preservation activities shall be conducted in accordance with implementing procedures promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior. The National Park Service has published technical standards and guidelines regard

ing archeological preservation activities and methods at 48 FR 44716 (September 29, 1983).

[44 FR 64177, Nov. 6, 1979, as amended at 50 FR 26316, June 25, 1985]

$6.302 Wetlands, floodplains, impor tant farmlands, coastal zones, wild and scenic rivers, fish and wildlife, and endangered species.

The following procedures shall apply to EPA administrative actions in programs to which the pertinent statute or executive order applies.

Executive

(a) Wetlands protection. Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, requires Federal agencies conducting cer tain activities to avoid, to the extent possible, the adverse impacts associated with the destruction or loss of wetlands and to avoid support of new construction in wetlands if a practicable alternative exists. EPA's Statement of Procedures on Floodplain Management

and Wetlands Protection

(dated January 5, 1979, incorporated as appendix A hereto) requires EPA programs to determine if proposed actions I will be in or will affect wetlands. If so, the responsible official shall prepare a floodplains/wetlands assessment, which will be part of the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement: The responsible official shall either avoid adverse impacts or minimize them if no practicable alternative to the action exists.

(b) Floodplain management. Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, requires Federal agencies to evaluate the potential effects of actions they may take in a floodplain to avoid, to the extent possible, adverse effects associated with direct and indirect development of a floodplain. EPA's Statement of Procedures on Floodplain Management and Wetlands Protection (dated January 5, 1979, incorporated as appendix A hereto), requires EPA programs to determine whether an action will be located in or will affect a floodplain. If so, the responsible official shall prepare a floodplain/wetlands assessment. The assessment will become part of the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement The responsible official shall either avoid adverse impacts or minimize