§1b.11. Definitions and acronyms. — Inbound Citations

(c) When a USDA subcomponent is the lead agency, the subcomponent may use an early and open process to determine the scope of issues and alternatives for analysis in an environmental impact statement, including identifying substantive issues (see § 1b.11(23) and (53)) and eliminating from further study non-substantive issues and action alternatives that are not technically or economically feasible or do not meet the purpose and need of the proposal (NEPA section 102(2)(C)(iii), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(iii)). Scoping may begin as soon as practicable after the proposal is sufficiently developed for consideration. Scoping may include appropriate pre-application procedures or work conducted prior to publication of the notice of intent. Scoping is not a statutorily required step in the NEPA review procedures and there is no prescribed process or procedure required for scoping. If a USDA subcomponent is the lead agency, and the responsible official chooses to apply a scoping process, the subcomponent may, as appropriate:

(1) Invite the participation of likely affected Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies and governments, the applicant, and other likely affected or interested persons;

(2) Hold a scoping meeting or meetings, publish scoping information, or use other means to communicate with those persons or agencies who may be interested or affected, which the subcomponent may integrate with any other early planning meeting; and

(i) Allocate assignments for preparation of the environmental impact statement when there are joint and/or cooperating agencies, with the lead agency retaining responsibility for the statement;

(ii) Identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues that are not substantive or have been covered by prior environmental review(s), narrowing the discussion of these issues in the environmental impact statement to a brief presentation of why they are not of a substantive nature that meaningfully informed the consideration of environmental effects and the resulting decision on how to proceed;

(iii) Identify and eliminate from detailed study action alternatives that are not technically or economically feasible or do not meet the purpose and need of the proposal (NEPA section 102(2)(C)(iii), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(iii));

(iv) Indicate any public environmental assessments and other environmental impact statements that are being or will be prepared and are related to, but are not part of, the scope of the impact statement under consideration;

(v) Identify other environmental review, authorization, and consultation requirements to allow for other required analyses and studies to be prepared concurrently and integrated with the environmental impact statement and ensure any joint and/or cooperating agencies have shared understanding of their role in meeting these requirements;

(vi) Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental impact statement and the subcomponent's (or agencies') tentative planning and decision-making schedule; and

(vii) Specify the USDA website where additional information will be provided as the environmental impact statement is developed.

(4) The breadth and depth of analysis in an environmental assessment will be tailored to ensure that the environmental analysis does not exceed this page limit. In this regard, as part of the finalization of the environmental assessment, a responsible official will certify (and the certification will be incorporated into the environmental assessment) that the USDA subcomponent has considered the factors mandated by NEPA; that the environmental assessment represents the subcomponent's good-faith effort to prioritize documentation of the substantive issues and most important considerations required by the Act within the congressionally mandated page limits; that this prioritization reflects the subcomponent's expert judgment; and that any issues or considerations addressed briefly or left unaddressed were, in the subcomponent's judgment, comparatively not of a substantive nature (see § 1b.11(53) of this part).

(a) A USDA subcomponent will prepare an environmental impact statement only with respect to proposed actions that otherwise require preparation of an environmental document and that have a reasonably foreseeable significant impact on the quality of the human environment (NEPA section 106(b)(1); 42 U.S.C. 4336(b)(1)). Whether an action rises to the level of significant is a matter of the responsible official's expert judgment, as informed by interdisciplinary analysis. Environmental impact statements will discuss effects in proportion to their reasonably foreseeable significance. With respect to issues that are not of a substantive nature (see § 1b.11(53)) there will be no more than the briefest possible discussion to explain why those issues are not substantive and therefore not deemed necessary, at the sole discretion of the responsible official, of any further analysis. Environmental impact statements will be analytic, concise, and no longer than necessary to comply with NEPA in light of the congressionally mandated page limits and deadlines.