[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 7, Volume 6]
[Revised as of January 1, 2003]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 7CFR650.11]

[Page 442-443]
 
                          TITLE 7--AGRICULTURE
 
   CHAPTER VI--NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF 
                               AGRICULTURE
 
PART 650--COMPLIANCE WITH NEPA--Table of Contents
 
            Subpart A--Procedures for NRCS-Assisted Programs
 
Sec. 650.11  Environmental documents.

    (a) NRCS is to use the following documents in compliance with NEPA 
(see Sec. 650.4):
    (1) Environmental assessments (EA)
    (2) Environmental impact statements (EIS)
    (3) Notice of intent (NOI)
    (4) Finding of no significant impact (FNSI)
    (5) Record of decision (ROD)
    (b) The format and content of each document is to be appropriate to 
the action being considered and consistent with the CEQ regulations.
    (1) To reduce duplication, NRCS may combine environmental documents 
with other planning documents of the same proposal, as appropriate. For 
example, NRCS, in consultation with CEQ and the office of the Secretary 
of Agriculture, has determined that each EIS is to satisfy the 
requirements for a regulatory impact analysis as required by Executive 
Order 12044. This may necessitate modifying the recommended CEQ format. 
If documents are combined, the RFO is to include the information and 
sections required by the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1502.10). The 
environmental impact statement should indicate those considerations, 
including factors not related to environmental quality, that are likely 
to be relevant to a decision.
    (2) The RFO is to establish the format and content of each document 
giving full consideration to the guidance and requirements of the CEQ 
regulations. The NRCS technical service center director is to provide 
guidance and concurrence on the format and content if the NRCS state 
conservationist is the RFO. The results of scoping are to determine the 
content of the EA or the EIS and the amount of detail needed to analyze 
the impacts.
    (3) In addition to the minimum requirements of the CEQ regulations 
(40 CFR 1502.10), environmental assessments and environmental impact 
statements are to include--
    (i) A brief description of public participation activities of 
agencies, groups, and individuals during the environmental evaluation;
    (ii) A description of the hazard potential of each alternative, 
including an explanation of the rationale for dam classification and the 
risk of dam failure from overtopping for other causes;
    (iii) Information identifying any approved regional plans for water 
resource management in the study area (40 CFR 1506.2(d)) and a statement 
on whether the proposed project is consistent with such plans;
    (iv) All Federal permits, licenses, and other entitlements that must 
be obtained (40 CFR 1502.25(b)); and
    (v) A brief description of major environmental problems, conflicts, 
and disagreements among groups and agencies and how they were resolved. 
Unresolved conflicts and the NRCS's proposal for resolving the 
disagreements before the project is implemented are to be summarized.
    (4) Letters of comment and responses. (40 CFR 1503.4, 1502.9(b)) 
Letters of comment that were received and the responses to these 
comments are to appended to the final EIS. Opposing views and other 
substantive comments that were not adequately discussed in the draft EIS 
are to be incorporated in the final EIS.
    (5) Appendix. The RFO may use an appendix to an EA or EIS. If an 
appendix is too voluminous to be circulated with the EIS, the RFO is to 
make it available on request. If an appendix is included it is to--
    (i) Meet the requirements of 40 CFR 1502.18;
    (ii) Identify any methodologies used (40 CFR 1502.24) and make 
explicit reference to other sources relied on for conclusions; and
    (iii) Briefly describe the relationship between the benefit-cost 
analysis and any analyses of unquantified environmental impacts, values, 
and amenities. ``For purposes of complying with the

[[Page 443]]

Act, the weighing of the merits or drawbacks of the various alternatives 
need not be displayed in a monetary cost benefit and should not be when 
these are important qualitative considerations.'' (40 CFR 1502.23).