Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP)

Federal RegisterDec 24, 1997

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force

32 CFR Part 989

RIN 0701-AA56

Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP)

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of the Air Force proposes to revise its

instruction to improve the Air Force process for compliance with the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Executive Order 12114,

Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions. The revisions

integrate environmental analysis and align environmental document

approval levels with the Air Force decision-making process. It also

expands Air Force environmental participants and responsibilities of

the Environmental Planning Function (EPF) and the proponent of an

action. The public is invited to submit comments on these changes to

the point of contact listed below.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than February 23, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted to HQ USAF/ILEVP, 1260 Air

Force Pentagon, Washington, DC 20330-1260.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Kenneth L. Reinertson or Mr. Jack C. Bush, (703) 695-8942.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion of Major Issues

a. References to procurement publications that provide separate

procedures for application of NEPA in the acquisition area are updated.

b. References to office symbols are updated.

c. Specific guidance is provided in section 989.3(c)(3) for

application of NEPA to single manager acquisition programs, specifying,

among other things, that the Air Force Acquisition Executive Office is

the final approval authority for all system-related NEPA documents.

[[Page 67306]]

d. More specific reference is provided in section 989.3(c)(4) as to

who are key Air Force participants and to the need for an integrated

team effort involving other federal agencies, state, Tribal, and local

governments, and interested members of the public.

e. More specific guidance is provided in section 989.3(d)(1) to

ensure the EIAP is integrated early in the planning stages of an

action.

f. Specific guidance is provided in section 989.3(d)(4) to promote

early internal scoping in order to determine what level of

environmental analysis is performed.

g. In section 989.3(e), the environmental planning function (EPF)

is designated as the primary support to the proponent in EIAP actions.

The EPF's responsibilities are specifically explained.

h. Section 989.3(h) provides for increased participation of the

public affairs office in the EIAP process.

i. Throughout the instruction, whenever participation of state and

local governments is provided for, Tribal governments have been added.

j. In section 989.5(b), certain continuing internal reporting

requirements regarding aircraft beddown and unit realignment actions

are eliminated.

k. In section 989.8(c), additional language notes that only in rare

instances is the no-action alternative excused by law from analysis.

l. In section 989.13(c), additional language notes the distinction,

in cases of analysis abroad, between exemptions under DoDD 6050.7 and

categorical exclusions (CATEXs). The exemptions are provided by

Executive Order 12114. CATEXs are provided by the implementing agency.

m. In section 989.14(d), additional guidance is provided to promote

substantive but brief EIAP analyses so as to avoid unnecessary data and

keep documents to a usable length.

n. In section 989.14(k), hazardous waste disposal sites have been

deleted from the list of actions normally requiring an EA.

o. The provision for abbreviated EAs has been deleted. As noted

above, analyses should be as lengthy as necessary but no more so; no

provision for a special type of EA is necessary.

p. In section 989.14(l), the proponent is now required to involve

other interested federal agencies, state, Tribal, and local

governments, and the public in preparing an EA.

q. In section 989.15(e), requirements regarding public review of

EAs and findings of no significant impact (FONSIs) are clarified to

ensure the public understands that the FONSI has not been signed prior

to public review.

r. In section 989.15(e)(2), the list of instances when mandatory 30

day public review of an EA and FONSI is required now includes those

that would have a disproportionately high and adverse environmental

effect on minority and low-income populations.

s. In section 989.18(a), more detailed guidance is provided to

improve the scoping process for environmental impact statements (EISs).

The guidance provides for an early, continuing, iterative process

involving other governmental entities, Congress, and the public in a

more meaningful manner. It also provides for scoping to continue

through preparation of the draft EIS.

t. In section 989.18(b), specific provision is made to include

minority and low-income populations in the scoping process.

u. In section 989.19(c)(3), specific provision is made to include

minority and low-income populations in the public review process of

EISs.

v. In section 989.27, the statement that compliance with OSHA

standards will mitigate hazards has been deleted.

w. A new Section 989.32 addresses aircraft noise data used in EIAP

analysis.

x. A new Section 989.33 requires compliance with E.O. 12898,

Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority

Populations and Low-Income Populations.

y. In section 989.34(b), guidance is clarified regarding emergency

situations and the need to still comply with NEPA. Compliance is still

required, but emergency responses may take place while completing the

EIAP.

z. In section 989.35(b), authority is provided to utilize the

internet to distribute documents and notices.

aa. A new Section 989.36 is included to address waivers for unusual

circumstances and to allow experimentation to help the EIAP process

grow. These waivers can only be approved by the Air Force Secretariat.

ab. The definition of ``scoping'' is changed to include affirmative

efforts to communicate with other federal agencies, state, Tribal, and

local governments, and the public.

ac. In section A2.2.8, an additional example dealing with proposals

having a significant adverse effect on minority and low-income

populations is included in the list of examples where use of a

categorical exclusion is likely to require additional analysis.

ad. In section A2.3, categorical exclusion A2.3.10 is changed to

include lead-based paint as an additional example.

ae. In section A2.3, categorical exclusion A2.3.18 is changed to

clarify that it does not apply in the case of a transfer to GSA.

af. In section A2.3, categorical exclusion A2.3.26 is changed to

refer to the Defense Environmental Restoration Program and RCRA

Corrective Action sites in place of a generic reference. Additionally,

the reference to the categorical exclusion not applying to the

selection of a remedial action is eliminated.

ag. In section A2.3, categorical exclusion A2.3.30 is changed by

deleting the reference to separate evaluation for long term cleanup and

remediation activities.

ah. In section A2.3, categorical exclusion A2.3.31 is changed by

restricting its use to non-repetitive situations. It also requires

documentation of its use.

ai. In section A2.3, categorical exclusion A2.3.36 is changed by

adding an additional limitation of 3000 feet above ground level.

aj. In section A3.1.3, flexibility is provided to public hearing

formats by allowing experimentation with different formats than

normally used, depending on the circumstances. Approval for deviations

must be approved by the Air Force Secretariat.

ak. In section A3.2.1.3, the public affairs office will now always

purchase a public advertisement to advise public hearings.

al. In section A3.6, responsibility for preparing and checking the

transcript of a public hearing is shifted from the military trial judge

to the EIS preparation team.

am. The provision for organizing speakers by subject at a public

hearing has been deleted.

an. In addition to the above specific items, there have been

numerous grammatical changes and minor clarifications made to the

instruction.

The Department of the Air Force has determined that this rule is

not a major rule because it will not have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more. The Secretary of the Air Force has

certified that this rule is exempt from the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, because this rule does

not have a significant economic impact on small entities as defined by

the Act, and does not impose any obligatory information requirements

beyond internal Air Force use.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 989

Environmental protection, Environmental impact statements.

[[Page 67307]]

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the United States Air Force

proposes to revise 32 CFR part 989 as follows:

PART 989--ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS (EIAP)

Sec.

989.1 Purpose.

989.2 Concept.

989.3 Responsibilities.

989.4 Initial considerations.

989.5 Organizational relationships.

989.6 Budgeting and funding.

989.7 Requests from non-Air Force agencies or entities.

989.8 Analysis of alternatives.

989.9 Cooperation and adoption.

989.10 Tiering.

989.11 Combining EIAP with other documentation.

989.12 Air Force Form 813 Request for Environmental Impact

Analysis.

989.13 Categorical exclusion.

989.14 Environmental assessment.

989.15 Finding of no significant impact.

989.16 Environmental impact statement.

989.17 Notice of intent.

989.18 Scoping.

989.19 Draft EIS.

989.20 Final EIS.

989.21 Record of decision (ROD).

989.22 Mitigation.

989.23 Contractor prepared documents.

989.24 Public notification.

989.25 Base closure and realignment.

989.26 Classifed actions (40 CFR 1507.3(c)).

989.27 Occupational safety and health.

989.28 Airspace and range proposals.

989.29 Force structure and unit move proposals.

989.30 Air quality.

989.31 Pollution prevention.

989.32 Noise.

989.33 Environmental justice.

989.34 Special and emergency procedures.

989.35 Reporting requirements.

989.36 Waivers.

989.37 Procedures for analysis abroad

989.38 Requirements for analysis abroad.

Attachment 1 to Part 989--Gloassary of References,

Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Terms.

Attachment 2 to Part 989--Categorical Exclusions.

Attachment 3 to Part 989--Procedures for Holding Public Hearings

on Draft Environmental Impact Statements (EIS).

Authority: 10 U.S.C. 8013.

Sec. 989.1 Purpose.

(a) This part implements the Air Force Environmental Impact

Analysis Process (EIAP) and provides procedures for environmental

impact analysis both within the United States and abroad. Because the

authority for, and rules governing, each aspect of the EIAP differ

depending on whether the action takes place in the United States or

outside the United States, this part provides largely separate

procedures for each type of action. Consequently, the main body of this

part deals primarily with environmental impact analysis under the

authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (Pub.

L. 91-190, 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) 4321-4347), while the primary

procedures for environmental impact analysis of actions outside the

United States in accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 12114,

Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, are contained in

Secs. 989.32 and 989.33.

(b) The procedures in this part are essential to achieve and

maintain compliance with NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality

(CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the

NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 1500-1508, referred to

as the ``CEQ Regulations''). Further requirements are contained in the

Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 4715.1, Environmental Security,

Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 4715.9, Environmental Planning

and Analysis, DoDD 5000.1, Defense Acquisition, and Department of

Defense 5000.2-R, Mandatory Procedures for Major Defense Acquisition

Programs (MDAPs) and Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS)

Acquisition Programs with Change 1.\1\ To comply with NEPA and complete

the EIAP, the CEQ Regulations and this part must be used together.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Copies of the publications are available, at cost, from the

National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce,

5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Executive Order 12114, and 32 CFR Part 187 (DoDD 6050.7, Environmental

Effects Abroad of Major Department of Defense Actions, March 31, 1979).

To comply with E.O. 12114 and complete the EIAP, the Executive Order,

32 CFR part 187, and this part must be used together.

(d) Attachment 1 is a glossary of references, abbreviations,

acronyms, and terms. Refer to 40 CFR part 1508 for definitions of other

terminology used in this part.

Sec. 989.2 Concept.

(a) This part provides a framework on how to comply with NEPA and

Executive Order 12114 according to Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD)

32-70.\2\ The Air Force specific procedures and requirements in this

part are intended to be used by Air Force decision makers to fully

comply with NEPA and the EIAP.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Major Commands (MAJCOM) provide additional implementing

guidance in their supplemental publications to this part. MAJCOM

supplements must identify the specific offices that have implementation

responsibility and include any guidance needed to comply with this

part. All references to MAJCOMs in this part include the Air National

Guard Readiness Center (ANGRC) and other agencies designated as

``MAJCOM equivalent'' by HQ USAF.

Sec. 989.3 Responsibilities.

(a) Office of the Secretary of the Air Force.

(1) The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for

Environment, Safety and Occupational Health (SAF/MIQ):

(i) Develops environmental planning policy and provides oversight

of the EIAP program.

(ii) Determines the level of environmental analysis required for

especially important, visible, or controversial Air Force proposals and

approves selected Environmental Assessments (EAs) and all Environmental

Impact Statements (EISs) prepared for Air Force actions, whether

classified or unclassified, except as specified in (c)(3) of this

section.

(iii) Is the liaison on environmental matters with Federal agencies

and national-level public interest organizations.

(iv) Ensures appropriate offices in the Office of the Secretary of

Defense are kept informed on EIAP matters of Defense-wide interest.

(2) The General Counsel (SAF/GC). Provides final legal advice to

SAF/MI, HQ USAF, and HQ USAF Environment, Safety and Occupational

Health Committee (ESOHC) on EIAP issues.

(3) Office of Legislative Liaison (SAF/LL):

(i) Assists with narrowing and defining key issues by arranging

consultations with congressional delegations on potentially sensitive

actions.

(ii) Distributes draft and final EISs to congressional delegations.

(iii) Reviews and provides the Office of the Secretary of Defense

(OSD) with analyses of the Air Force position on proposed and enrolled

legislation and executive department testimony dealing with EIAP

issues.

(4) Office of Public Affairs (SAF/PA):

(i) Reviews and clears environmental documents in accordance with

Air Force Instruction 35-205, Air Force Security and Policy Review,\3\

prior to public release.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(ii) Assists the environmental planning function and the Air Force

Legal Services Agency, Trial Judiciary

[[Page 67308]]

Division (AFLSA/JAJT), in planning and conducting public scoping

meetings and hearings.

(iii) Ensures that public affairs aspects of all EIAP actions are

conducted in accordance with this part and Air Force Instruction (AFI)

35-202, Environmental Community Involvement\4\.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(iv) The National Guard Bureau, Office of Public Affairs (NGB-PA),

will assume the responsibilities of SAF/PA for the EIAP involving the

National Guard Bureau, Air Directorate.

(b) Headquarters US Air Force (HQ USAF). The Civil Engineer (HQ

USAF/ILE) is responsible for execution of the EIAP program. The

National Guard Bureau Air Directorate (NGB-CF) oversees the EIAP for

Air National Guard actions.

(FOAs), and Single Manager Programs. These organizations establish

procedures that comply with this part wherever they are the host unit

for preparing and using required environmental documentation in making

decisions about proposed actions and programs within their commands or

areas of responsibility.

(1) Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE). The

AFCEE Environmental Conservation and Planning Directorate (AFCEE/EC) is

available to provide technical assistance and has the capability to

provide contract support to the proponent, EPF, and MAJCOMs in

developing EIAP documents.

(2) Air Force Regional Environmental Offices (REOs). REOs review

non-Air Force environmental documents that may have an impact on the

Air Force. Requests for review of such documents should be directed to

the proper REO (Atlanta, Dallas, or San Francisco) along with any

relevant comments. The REO:

(i) Notifies the proponent, after receipt, that the REO is the

single point of contact for the Air Force review of the document.

(ii) Requests comments from potentially affected installations,

MAJCOMs, the ANG, and HQ USAF, as appropriate.

(iii) Consolidates comments into the Air Force official response

and submits the final response to the proponent.

(iv) Provides to HQ USAF/ILEVP and the appropriate MAJCOMs and

installations a copy of the final response and a complete set of all

review comments.

(3) Single Manager Acquisition Programs (system-related NEPA). The

proponent Single Manager (i.e., System Program Director, Materiel Group

Managers, and Product Group Managers) for all programs, regardless of

acquisition category, shall comply with DoD 5000.2-R.\5\ SAF/AQR, as

the Air Force Acquisition Executive Office, is the final approval

authority for all system-related NEPA documents. SAF/AQR is responsible

for accomplishing appropriate Headquarters EPC/ESOHC review. The Single

Manager will obtain appropriate Product Center EPC approval prior to

forwarding necessary EIAP documents (i.e., NOIs and preliminary draft

and final EAs and EISs) to SAF/AQR. The Single Manager will allow for

concurrent review of EIAP documents by HQ AFMC/ILEV and the Operational

Command (HQ ACC, HQ AMC, HQ AFSPC, etc.). The Single Manager is

responsible for budgeting and funding EIAP efforts, including EIAP for

research, development, testing, and evaluation activities.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) Key Air Force Environmental Participants. The EIAP must be

approached as an integrated team effort including key participants

within the Air Force and also involving outside federal agencies,

state, Tribal, and local governments, interested outside parties,

citizens groups, and the general public. Key Air Force participants may

include the following functional areas, as well as others:

Proponent

Civil Engineers/Environmental Planning Function

Staff Judge Advocate

Public Affairs

Medical Service (Bioenvironmental Engineer)

Safety Office

Range and Airspace Managers

Bases and Units

Plans and Programs

Logistics

Personnel

Legislative Liaison

(d) Proponent. Each office, unit, or activity at any level that

initiates Air Force actions is responsible for:

(1) The EIAP and shall ensure integration of the EIAP during the

initial planning stages of proposed actions so that planning and

decisions reflect environmental values, delays are avoided later in the

process, and potential conflicts are precluded.

(2) Notifying the EPF of a pending action and completion Section I

of AF Form 813. Prepare the Description Of Proposed Action and

Alternatives (DOPAA) through an interdisciplinary team approach

including the EPF and other key Air Force participants.

(3) Identifying key decision points and coordinating with the EPF

on EIAP phasing to ensure that environment documents are available to

the decision-maker before the final decision is made and ensuring that,

until the EIAP is complete, resources are not committed prejudicing the

selection of alternatives nor actions taken having an adverse

environmental impact or limiting the choice of reasonable alternatives.

(4) Determining, with the EPF, as early as possible whether to

prepare an EIS. The proponent and the EPF will conduct an early

internal scoping process as part of the EIAP process. The internal

scoping process should involve key Air Force environmental participants

(See Sec. 989.3(c)(4)) and other Air Force offices as needed and

conclude with preparation of a DOPAA. For complex or detailed EAs or

EISs, an outside facilitator trained in EIAP may be used to focus and

guide the discussion. Department of the Air Force personnel, rather

than contractors, should generally be used to prepare the DOPAA.

(5) Presenting the DOPAA to the EPC for review and comment.

(6) Coordinating with the EPF, Public Affairs, and Staff Judge

Advocate prior to organizing public or interagency meetings which deal

with EIAP elements of a proposed action and involving persons or

agencies outside the Air Force.

(7) Subsequent to the decision to prepare an EIS, assisting the EPF

and Public Affairs Office in preparing a draft Notice of Intent (NOI)

to prepare an EIS. All NOIs must be forwarded through the MAJCOM EPF to

HQ USAF/ILEV for review and publication in the Federal Register.

Publication in the Federal Register is accomplished in accordance with

AFI 37-120, Federal Register.\6\ (See Sec. 989.17.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ See footnote 1 of Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(8) Ensuring that proposed actions are implemented as described in

the final EIAP decision documents.

(e) Environmental Planning Function (EPF). At every level of

command, the EPF is one of the key Air Force participants responsible

for the EIAP. The EPF can be the environmental flight within a civil

engineer squadron, a separate environmental management office at an

installation, the ILEV at MAJCOMs, or an equivalent environmental

function located with a program office. The EPF:

(1) Supports the EIAP by bringing key participants in at the

beginning of a proposed action and involving them throughout the EIAP.

Key participants

[[Page 67309]]

play an important role in defining and focusing key issues at the

initial stage.

(2) At the request of the proponent, prepares environmental

documents using an interdisciplinary approach, or obtains technical

assistance through Air Force channels on contract support. Assists the

proponent in obtaining review of environmental documents.

(3) Assists the proponent in preparing a (DOPAA) and actively

supports the proponent during all phases of the EIAP.

(4) Evaluates proposed actions and completes Section II and III of

AF Form 813, Request for Environmental Impact Analysis, subsequent to

submission by the proponent and determines whether a Categorical

Exclusion (CATEX) applies. The responsible EPF member signs the AF Form

813 certification.

(5) Identifies and documents, with technical advice from the

Bioenvironmental Engineer and other staff members, environmental

quality standards that relate to the action under evaluation.

(6) Supports the proponent in preparing environmental documents, or

obtains technical assistance through Air Force channels or contract

support and adopts the documents as official Air Force papers when

completed and approved.

(7) Ensures the EIAP is conducted on base-level and MAJCOM-level

plans, including contingency plans for the training, movement, and

operations of Air Force personnel and equipment.

(8) Prepares the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS with

assistance from the proponent and the Public Affairs Office.

(9) Prepares applicable portions of the Certificate of Compliance

for each military construction project according to AFI 32-1021,

Planning and Programming of Facility Construction Projects.\7\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(10) Submits one hard copy and one electronic copy of the final EA/

Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and EIS/Record of Decision

(ROD) to the Defense Technical Information Center.

(f) Environmental Protection Committee (EPC). The EPC helps

commanders assess, review and approve EIAP documents in accordance with

AFI 32-7005, Environmental Protection Committee.\8\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(g) Staff Judge Advocate (SJA). The Staff Judge Advocate:

(1) Advises the proponent, EPF, and EPC on CATEX determinations and

the legal sufficiency of environmental documents.

(2) Advises the EPF during the scoping process of issues that

should be addressed in EIS's and on procedures for the conduct of

public hearings.

(3) Coordinates the appointment of the independent hearing officer

with AFLSA/JAJT and provides support for the hearing officer in cases

of public hearings on the draft EIS. The proponent pays administrative

and Temporary Duty (TDY) costs. The hearing officer presides at

hearings and makes final decisions regarding hearing procedures.

(4) Promptly refers all matters causing or likely to cause

substantial public controversy or litigation through channels to AFLSA/

JACE (or NGB-JA).

(h) Public Affairs Officer. This officer:

(1) Advises the EPF, the EPC, and the proponent on public affairs

activities on proposed actions and reviews environmental documents for

public involvement issues;

(2) Advises the EPF of issues and competing interests that should

be addressed in the EIS or EA.

(3) Assists in preparation of and attends public meetings or media

sessions on environmental issues.

(4) Prepares, coordinates, and distributes news releases and other

public information materials related to the proposal and associated

EIAP documents.

(5) Notifies the media (television, radio, newspaper) and purchases

advertisements when newspapers will not run notices free of charge. The

EPF will fund the required advertisements.

(6) Determines and ensures Security Review requirements are met for

all information proposed for public release.

(7) For more comprehensive instructions about public affairs

activities in environmental matters, see AFI 35-202.\9\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(i) Medical Service. The Medical Service, represented by the

Bioenvironmental Engineer, provides technical assistance to EPF's in

the areas of environmental health standards, environmental effects, and

environmental monitoring capabilities. The Air Force Armstrong

Laboratory, Occupational and Environmental Health Directorate, provides

additional technical support.

(j) Safety Office. The Safety Office provides technical review and

assistance to EPFs to ensure consideration of safety standards and

requirements.

Sec. 989.4 Initial considerations.

Air Force personnel will:

(a) Consider and document environmental effects on proposed Air

Force actions through AF Forms 813, EAs, FONSIs, EISs, EIS (RODs), and

documents prepared according to E.O. 12114.

(b) Evaluate proposed actions for possible CATEX from environmental

impact analysis (attachment 2).

including those of other federal agencies, state, Tribal, and local

governments, and the public, part of the record available for review

and use at all levels of decision making.

(d) Review the specific alternatives analyzed in the EIAP when

evaluating the proposal prior to decision making.

(e) Ensure that alternatives to be considered by the decision-maker

are both reasonable and within the range of alternatives analyzed in

the environmental documents.

(f) Pursue the objective of furthering foreign policy and national

security interests while at the same time considering important

environmental factors.

(g) Consider the environmental effects of actions that affect the

global commons.

(h) Determine whether any foreign government should be informed of

the availability of environmental documents. Formal arrangements with

foreign governments concerning environmental matters and communications

with foreign governments concerning environmental agreements will be

coordinated with the Department of State by the Deputy Assistant

Secretary of the Air Force for Environment, Safety, and Occupational

Health (SAF/MIQ) through the Assistant Secretary of Defense. This

coordination requirement does not apply to informal working-level

communications and arrangements.

Sec. 989.5 Organizational relationships.

The host EPF manages the EIAP using an interdisciplinary team

approach. This is especially important for tenant-proposed actions,

because the host command is responsible for the EIAP for actions

related to the host command's installations.

(a) The host command prepares environmental documents internally or

directs the host base to prepare the environmental documents.

Environmental document preparation may be by contract (requiring the

tenant to fund the EIAP), by the tenant unit, or by the host.

Regardless of the preparation method, the host command will ensure the

required environmental analysis is accomplished before a decision is

made on the proposal and an action is undertaken. Support

[[Page 67310]]

agreements should provide specific procedures to ensure host oversight

of tenant compliance, tenant funding or reimbursement of host EIAP

costs, and tenant compliance with the EIAP regardless of the tenant not

being an Air Force organization.

(b) For aircraft beddown and unit realignment actions, program

elements are identified in the Program Objective Memorandum. Subsequent

Programs Change Requests must include AF Form 813.

information copies of all Mission Need Statements and System

Operational Requirements Documents to SAF/MIQ, HQ USAF/ILEV (or ANGRC/

CEV), the Air Force Medical Operations Agency, Aerospace Medicine

Office (AFMOA/SG), and the affected MAJCOM EPFs.

(d) The MAJCOM of the scheduling unit managing affected airspace is

responsible for preparing and approving environmental analyses.

Sec. 989.6 Budgeting and funding.

Contract EIAP efforts are proponent MAJCOM responsibilities. Each

year, the EPF programs for anticipated out-year EIAP workloads based on

inputs from command proponents. If proponent offices exceed the budget

in a given year or identify unforeseen requirements, the proponent

offices must provide the remaining funding.

Sec. 989.7 Requests from Non-Air Force agencies or entities.

Non-Air Force agencies or entities may request the Air Force to

undertake an action, such as issuing a permit or outleasing Air Force

property, that may primarily benefit the requester or an agency other

than the Air Force. The EPF and other Air Force staff elements must

identify such requests and coordinate with the proponent of the non-Air

Force proposal, as well as with concerned state, Tribal, and local

governments.

(a) Air Force decisions on such proposals must take into

consideration the potential environmental impacts of the applicant's

proposed activity (as described in an Air Force environmental

document), insofar as the proposed action involves Air Force property

or programs, or requires Air Force approval.

(b) The Air Force may require the requester to prepare, at the

requester's expense, an analysis of environmental impacts (40 CFR

1506.5), or the requester may be required to pay for an EA or EIS to be

prepared by a contractor selected and supervised by the Air Force. The

EPF may permit requesters to submit draft EAs for their proposed

actions, except for actions described in Sec. 989.16(a) and (b), or for

actions the EPF has reason to believe will ultimately require an EIS.

For EISs the EPF has the responsibility to prepare the environmental

document, although responsibility for funding remains with the

requester. The fact that the requester has prepared environmental

documents at its own expense does not commit the Air Force to allow or

undertake the proposed action or its alternatives. The requester is not

entitled to any preference over other potential parties with whom the

Air Force might contract or make similar arrangements.

environmental analysis entitled to reimbursement from the Air Force.

When requesters prepare environmental documents outside the Air Force,

the Air Force must independently evaluate and approve the scope and

content of the environmental analyses before using the analyses to

fulfill EIAP requirements. Any outside environmental analysis must

evaluate reasonable alternatives as defined in Sec. 989.8.

Sec. 989.8 Analysis of alternatives.

The Air Force must analyze reasonable alternatives to the proposed

action and the ``no action'' alternative in all EAs and EISs, as fully

as the proposed action alternative.

(a) ``Reasonable'' alternatives are those that meet the underlying

purpose and need for the proposed action and that would cause a

reasonable person to inquire further before choosing a particular

course of action. Reasonable alternatives are not limited to those

directly within the power of the Air Force to implement. They may

involve another government agency or military service to assist in the

project or even to become the lead agency. The Air Force must also

consider reasonable alternatives raised during the scoping process (see

Sec. 989.18) or suggested by others, as well as combinations of

alternatives. The Air Force need not analyze highly speculative

alternatives, such as those requiring a major, unlikely change in law

or governmental policy. If the Air Force identifies a large number of

reasonable alternatives, it may limit alternatives selected for

detailed environmental analysis to a reasonable range or to a

reasonable number of examples covering the full spectrum of

alternatives.

(b) The Air Force may expressly eliminate alternatives from

detailed analysis, based on reasonable selection standards (for

example, operational, technical, or environmental standards suitable to

a particular project). In consultation with the EPF, proponents may

develop written selection standards to firmly establish what is a

``reasonable'' alternative for a particular project, but they must not

so narrowly define these standards that they unnecessarily limit

consideration to the proposal initially favored by proponents. This

discussion of reasonable alternatives applies equally to EAs and EISs.

Force must always consider and assess the environmental impacts of the

``no action'' alternative. ``No action'' may mean either that current

management practice will not change or that the proposed action will

not take place. If no action would result in other predictable actions,

those actions should be discussed within the no action alternative

section. The discussion of the no action alternative and the

alternatives should be comparable in detail to that of the proposed

action.

Sec. 989.9 Cooperation and adoption.

(a) Lead and Cooperating Agency (40 CFR 1501.5-1501.6). When the

Air Force is a cooperating agency in the preparation of an EIS, the Air

Force reviews and approves principal environmental documents within the

EIAP as if they were prepared by the Air Force. The Air Force executes

a ROD for its program decisions that are based on an EIS for which the

Air Force is a cooperating agency. The Air Force may also be a lead or

cooperating agency on an EA using similar procedures, but the MAJCOM

EPC retains approval authority unless otherwise directed by HQ USAF.

Before invoking provisions of 40 CFR 1501.5(e), the lowest authority

level possible resolves disputes concerning which agency is the lead or

cooperating agency.

(b) Adoption of EA or EIS. The Air Force, even though not a

cooperating agency, may adopt an EA or EIS prepared by another entity

where the proposed action is substantially the same as the action

described in the EA or EIS. In this case, the EA or EIS must be

recirculated as a final EA or EIS but the Air Force must independently

review the EA or EIS and determine that it is current and that it

satisfies the requirements of this part. The Air Force then prepares

its own FONSI or ROD, as the case may be. In the situation where the

proposed action is not substantially the same as that described in the

EA or the EIS, the Air Force may adopt the EA or EIS, or a portion

thereof, by

[[Page 67311]]

circulating the EA or EIS as a draft and then preparing the final EA or

EIS.

Sec. 989.10 Tiering.

The Air Force should use tiered (40 CFR 1502.20) environmental

documents, and environmental documents prepared by other agencies, to

eliminate repetitive discussions of the same issues and to focus on the

issues relating to specific actions. If the Air Force adopts another

Federal agency's environmental document, subsequent Air Force

environmental documents may also be tiered.

Sec. 989.11 Combining EIAP with other documentation.

(a) The EPF combines environmental analysis with other related

documentation when practicable (40 CFR 1506.4) following the procedures

prescribed by the CEQ regulations and this part.

(b) The EPF must integrate comprehensive planning (AFI 32-7062, Air

Force Comprehensive Planning \10\) with the requirements of the EIAP.

Prior to making a decision to proceed, the EPF must analyze the

environmental impacts that could result from implementation of a

proposal identified in the comprehensive plan.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 989.12 Air Form 813, Request for Environmental Impact Analysis.

The Air Force uses AF Form 813 to document the need for

environmental analysis or for certain CATEX determinations for proposed

actions. The form helps narrow and focus the issues to potential

environmental impacts. AF Form 813 must be retained with the EA or EIS

to record the focusing of environmental issues. The rationale for not

addressing environmental issues must also be recorded in the EA or EIS.

Sec. 989.13 Categorical exclusion.

(a) CATEXs define those categories of actions that do not

individually or cumulatively have potential for significant effect on

the environment and do not, therefore, require further environmental

analysis in an EA or an EIS. The list of Air Force-approved CATEXs is

in attachment 2. Supplements to this part may not add CATEXs or expand

the scope of the CATEXs in attachment 2.

(b) Characteristics of categories of actions that usually do not

require either an EIS or an EA (in the absence of extraordinary

circumstances) include:

(1) Minimal adverse effect on environmental quality.

(2) No significant change to existing environmental conditions.

(3) No significant cumulative environmental impact.

(4) Socioeconomic effects only.

(5) Similarity to actions previously assessed and found to have no

significant environmental impacts.

General exemptions specific to actions abroad are in 32 CFR part 187.

The EPF or other decision-maker forwards requests for additional

exemption determinations for actions abroad to HQ USAF/ILEV with a

justification letter.

(d) Normally, any decision-making level may determine the

applicability of a CATEX and need not formally record the determination

on AF Form 813 or elsewhere, except as noted in the CATEX list.

(e) Application of a CATEX to an action does not eliminate the need

to meet air conformity requirements (see Sec. 989.28).

Sec. 989.14 Environmental assessment.

(a) When a proposed action is one not usually requiring an EIS but

is not categorically excluded, the EPF supports the proponent in

preparing an EA (40 CFR 1508.9). Every EA must lead to either a FONSI,

a decision to prepare an EIS, or no decision on the proposal.

(b) Whenever a proposed action usually requires an EIS, the EPF

responsible for the EIAP may prepare an EA to definitively determine if

an EIS is required based on the analysis of environmental impacts.

Alternatively, the EPF may choose to bypass the EA and proceed with

preparation of an EIS.

(1) Provides analysis sufficient to determine whether to prepare an

EIS or a FONSI.

(2) Aids the Air Force in complying with the NEPA when no EIS is

required.

(d) The length of an EA should be as short and concise as possible,

while matching the magnitude of the proposal. An EA briefly discusses

the need for the proposed action, reasonable alternatives to the

proposed action, the affected environment, the environmental impacts of

the proposed action and alternatives (including the ``no action''

alternative), and a listing of agencies and persons consulted during

preparation. The EA should not contain long descriptions or lengthy,

detailed data. Rather, incorporate by reference background data to

support the concise discussion of the proposal and relevant issues.

(e) The format for the EA may be the same as the EIS. The

alternatives section of an EA and an EIS are similar and should follow

the alternatives analysis guidance outlined in Sec. 989.8.

(f) The EPF should design the EA to facilitate rapidly transforming

the document into an EIS if the environmental analysis reveals a

significant impact.

(g) EAs for actions where the Air Force has wetlands or floodplains

compliance responsibilities (E.O. 11988 and E.O. 11990) require SAF/MIQ

approval. As a finding contained in the draft FONSI, a Finding of No

Practicable Alternative (FONPA) must be submitted (five hard copies and

an electronic version) through the MAJCOM EPF to HQ USAF/ILEVP when the

alternative selected is located in wetlands or floodplains, and must

discuss why no other practicable alternative exists to avoid impacts.

See AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management \11\.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(h) EAs and accompanying FONSIs that require the Air Force to make

Clean Air Act General Conformity Determinations shall be submitted

(five hard copies and an electronic version) through the MAJCOM EPF to

HQ USAF/ILEVP for SAF/MIQ approval. SAF/MIQ signs all General

Conformity Determinations and will also sign the companion FONSIs, when

requested by the MAJCOM (see Sec. 989.30).

(i) In cases potentially involving a high degree of controversy or

Air force-wide concern, the MAJCOM, after consultation with HQ USAF/

ILEVP, may request HQ USAF ESOHC review and approval of an EA, or HQ

USAF may direct the MAJCOM to forward an EA (five hard copies and an

electronic version) for HQ USAF ESOHC review and approval.

(j) As a minimum, the following EAs require MAJCOM approval because

they involve topics of special importance or interest. Unless directed

otherwise by HQ USAF/ILEVP, the installation EPF must forward the

following types of EAs to the MAJCOM EPF, along with an unsigned draft

FONSI: (MAJCOMs can require other EAs receive MAJCOM approval in

addition to those types specified here.)

(1) All EAs on non-Air Force proposals that require an Air Force

decision, such as use of Air Force property for highways, space ports

and joint-use proposals.

(2) EAs where mitigation to insignificance is accomplished in lieu

of initiating an EIS (Sec. 989.22(c)).

(k) A few examples of actions that normally require preparation of

an EA (except as indicated in the CATEX list) include:

[[Page 67312]]

(1) Public land withdrawals of less than 5,000 acres.

(2) Minor mission realignments and aircraft beddowns.

(3) New building construction on base within developed areas.

(4) Minor modifications to Military Operating Areas (MOAs), air-to-

ground weapons ranges, and military training routes.

(l) The Air Force proponent will involve other federal agencies,

state, Tribal, and local governments, and the public in the preparation

of EAs (40 CFR 1501.4(b) and 1506.6). The extent of involvement usually

coincides with the magnitude and complexity of the proposed action and

its potential environmental effect on the area. For proposed actions

described in Sec. 989.15(e)(2), use either the scoping process

described in Sec. 989.18 or the public notice process in Sec. 989.24.

Sec. 989.15 Finding of no significant impact.

(a) The FONSI (40 CFR Sec. 1508.13) briefly describes why an action

would not have a significant effect on the environment and thus will

not be the subject of an EIS. The FONSI must summarize the EA or,

preferably, have it attached and incorporated by reference, and must

note any other environmental documents related to the action.

(b) If the EA is not incorporated by reference, the FONSI must

include:

(1) Name of the action.

(2) Brief description of the action (including alternatives

considered and the chosen alternative).

(3) Brief discussion of anticipated environmental effects.

(4) Conclusions leading to the FONSI.

(5) All mitigation actions that will be adopted with implementation

of the proposal (see Sec. 989.22).

exceed two typewritten pages. Stand-alone FONSIs without an attached EA

may be longer.

(d) For actions of regional or local interest, disseminate the

FONSI according to Sec. 989.23. The MAJCOM and NGB are responsible for

release of FONSIs to regional offices of Federal agencies, the state

single point of contact (SPOC), and state agencies concurrent with

local release by the installations.

(e) The EPF must make the EA and unsigned FONSI available to the

affected public and provide the EA and unsigned FONSI to organizations

and individuals requesting them and to whomever the proponent or the

EPF has reason to believe is interested in the action, unless

disclosure is precluded for security classification reasons. Draft EAs

and unsigned draft FONSIs will be clearly identified as drafts and

distributed via cover letter which will explain their purpose and need.

The EPF provides a copy of the documents without cost to organizations

and individuals requesting them. the FONSI transmittal date (date of

letter of transmittal) to the state SPOC or other equivalent agency is

the official notification date.

(1) Before the FONSI is signed and the action is implemented, the

EPF should allow sufficient time to receive comments from the public.

The time period will reflect the magnitude of the proposed action and

its potential for controversy. The greater the magnitude of the

proposed action or its potential for controversy, the longer the time

that must be allowed for public review. Mandatory review periods for

certain defined actions are contained in Sec. 989.15(e)(2). These are

not all inclusive but merely specific examples. In every case where an

EA and FONSI are prepared, the proponent and EPF must determine how

much time will be allowed for public review. In all cases, other than

classified actions, a public review period should be the norm unless

clearly unnecessary due to the lack of potential controversy.

(2) In the following circumstances, the EA and unsigned FONSI are

made available for public review for at least 30 days before FONSI

approval and implementing the action (40 CFR 1501.4(e)(2)):

(i) When the proposed action is, or is closely similar to, one that

usually requires preparation of an EIS (see Sec. 989.16).

(ii) If it is an unusual case, a new kind of action, or a

precedent-setting case in terms of its potential environmental impacts.

(iii) If the proposed action would be located in a floodplain or

wetland.

(iv) If the action is mitigated to insignificance in the FONSI, in

lieu of an EIS Sec. 989.22(c)).

(v) If the proposed action is a change to airspace use of

designation.

(vi) If the proposed action would have a disproportionately high

and adverse environmental effect on minority and low-income

populations.

(f) As a general rule, the same organizational level that prepares

the EA also reviews and recommends the FONSI for approval by the EPC.

MAJCOMs may decide the level of EA approval and FONSI signature, except

as provided in Sec. 989.14(g).

Sec. 989.16 Environmental impact statement.

(a) Certain classes of environmental impacts normally require

preparation of an EIS (40 CFR part 1501.4). These include, but are not

limited to:

(1) Potential for significant degradation of the environment.

(2) Potential for significant threat or hazard to public health or

safety.

(3) Substantial environmental controversy concerning the

significance or nature of the environmental impact of a proposed

action.

(b) Certain other action normally, but not always, require and EIS.

These include, but are not limited to:

(1) Public land withdrawals of over 5,000 acres (Engle Act, 43

U.S.C. 155-158).

(2) Establishment of new air-to-ground weapons ranges.

(3) Site selection of new airfields.

(4) Site selection of major installations.

(5) Development of major new weapons systems (at decision points

that involve demonstration, validation, production, deployment, and

area or site selection for deployment).

(6) Establishing or expanding supersonic training areas overland

below 30,000 feet MSL (mean sea level).

(7) Disposal and reuse of closing installations.

Sec. 989.17 Notice of intent.

The EPF must furnish, through the MAJCOM, to HQ USAF/ILEV the NOI

(40 CFR 1508.22) describing the proposed action for congressional

notification and publication in the Federal Register. The EPF, through

the host base public affairs office, will also provide the approved NOI

to newspapers and other media in the area potentially affected by the

proposed action. The EPF must provide copies of the notice to the SPOC

and must also distribute it to requesting agencies, organizations, and

individuals. Along with the draft NOI, the EPF must also forward the

completed DOPPA, through the MAJCOM, to HQ USAF for information.

Sec. 989.18 Scoping.

(a) After publication of the NOI for an EIS, the EPF must initiate

the public scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) to determine the scope of

issues to be addressed and to help identify significant environmental

issues to be analyzed in depth. Methods of scoping range from

soliciting written comments

[[Page 67313]]

to conducting pubic scoping meetings (see 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1506.6(e)).

The scoping process is an iterative, pro-active process of

communicating with individual citizens, neighborhood, community, and

local leaders, public interest groups, congressional delegations,

state, Tribal, and local governments, and federal agencies. The scoping

process must start prior to official public scoping meetings and

continue through to preparation of the draft EIS. The purpose of this

process is to de-emphasize insignificant issues and focus the scope of

the environmental analysis on significant issues (40 CFR 1500.4(g)).

Additionally, scoping allows early and more meaningful participation by

the public. The result of scoping is that the proponent and EPF

determine the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be

considered in the EIS (40 CFR 1508.125). The EPF must send plans for

scoping meetings to AF/ILEV (or ANGRC/CEV) for SAF/MIQ concurrence no

later than 30 days before the first scoping meeting. Scoping meeting

plans are similar in content to public hearing plans (see attachment

3). Public scoping meetings should generally be held at locations not

on the installation.

(b) Where it is anticipated the proposed action and its

alternatives will affect minority and low-income populations, special

efforts shall be made to reach these populations. This might include

special informational meetings or notices in minority and low-income

areas concerning the regular scoping process.

Sec. 989.19 Draft EIS.

(a) Preliminary draft. The EPF supports the proponent in

preparation of a Preliminary draft EIS (PDEIS) (40 CFR 1502.9) based on

the scope of issues decided on during the scoping process. The format

of the EIS must be in accordance with the format recommended in the CEQ

regulations (40 CFR 1502.10 and 1502.11). The CEQ regulations indicate

that EISs normally contain fewer than 150 pages (300 pages for

proposals of unusual complexity). The EPF provides a sufficient number

of copies of the PDEIS to HQ USAF/ILEV for HQ USAF ESOHC security and

policy review in each member's area of responsibility and to AFCEE/EC

for technical review.

(b) Review of draft EIS. After the HQ USAF ESOHC review, the EPF

assists the proponent in making any necessary revisions to the PDEIS

and forwards it to HQ USAF/ILEV as a draft EIS to ensure completion of

all security and policy reviews and to certify releasability. Once the

draft EIS is approved, HQ USAF/ILEV notifies the EPF to print

sufficient copies of the draft EIS for distribution to congressional

delegations and interested agencies at least seven calendar days prior

to publication of the Notice of Availability (NOA) in the Federal

to all others on the distribution list. HQ USAF/ILEV then files the

document with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and

provides a copy to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for

Environmental Security.

(1) The public comment period for the draft EIS is at least 45 days

starting from the publication date of the NOA of the draft EIS in the

Federal Register. USEPA publishes in the Federal Register NOAs of EISs

filed during the preceding week. This public comment period may be

extended by the EPF. If the draft EIS is unusually long, the EPF may

distribute a summary to the public with an attached list of locations

(such as public libraries) where the entire draft EIS may be reviewed.

The EPF must distribute the full draft EIS to certain entities, for

example agencies with jurisdiction by law or agencies with special

expertise in evaluating the environmental impacts, and anyone else

requesting the entire draft EIS (40 CFR 1502.19 and 1506.6).

(2) The EPF sponsors public hearings on the draft EIS according to

the procedures in attachment 3. Hearings take place no sooner than 15

days after the Federal Register publication of the NOA and at least 15

days before the end of the comment period. Scheduling hearings toward

the end of the comment period is encouraged to allow the public to

obtain and more thoroughly review the draft EIS. The EPF must provide

hearing plans to HQ USAF/ILEV (or ANGRC/CEV) for SAF/MIQ concurrence no

later than 30 days prior to the first public hearing. Public hearings

should generally be held at off-base locations. Submit requests to

deviate from procedures in attachment 3 to HQ USAF/ILEVP for SAF/MIQ

approval.

(3) Where analyses indicate that a proposed action will potentially

have a disproportionate impact on minority or low-income populations,

the EPF should make special efforts to ensure that these potentially

impacted populations are brought into the review process.

(d) Response to comments (40 CFR 1503.4). The EPF must incorporate

in the Final EIS its responses to comments on the Draft EIS by

modifying the text and referring in the appendix to where the comment

is addressed or providing a written explanation in the comments

section, or both. The EPF may group comments of a similar nature

together to allow a common response and may also respond to individuals

separately.

(e) Seeking additional comments. The EPF may, at any time during

the EIS process, seek additional public comments, such as when there

has been a significant change in circumstances, development of

significant new information of a relevant nature, or where there is

substantial environmental controversy concerning the proposed action.

Significant new information leading to public controversy regarding the

scope after the scoping process is such a changed circumstance. An

additional public comment period may also be necessary after the

publication of the draft EIS due to public controversy or changes made

as the result of previous public comments. Such periods when additional

public comments are sought shall last for at least 30 days.

Sec. 989.20 Final EIS.

(a) If changes in the draft EIS are minor or limited to factual

corrections and responses to comments, the proponent and EPF may, with

the prior approval of SAF/MIQ, prepare a document containing only

comments on the Draft EIS, Air Force responses, and errata sheets of

changes staffed to the HQ USAF ESOHC for coordination. However, the EPF

must submit the draft EIS and all of the above documents, with a new

cover sheet indicating that it is a final EIS (40 CFR 1503.4(c)), to HQ

USAF/ILEV for filing with the EPA (40 CFR 1506.9). If more extensive

modifications are required, the EPF must prepare a preliminary final

EIS incorporating these modifications for coordination within the Air

Force. Regardless of which procedure is followed, the final EIS must be

processed in the same way as the draft EIS, including receipt of copies

of the EIS by SAF/LLP, except that the public need not be invited to

comment during the 30-day post-filing waiting period. The Final EIS

should be furnished to every person, organization, or agency that made

substantive comments on the Draft EIS or requested a copy. Although the

EPF is not required to respond to public comments received during this

period, comments received must be considered in determining final

decisions such as identifying the preferred alternative, appropriate

mitigations, or if a supplemental analysis is required.

(b) The EPF processes all necessary supplements to EISs (40 CFR

1502.9) in

[[Page 67314]]

the same way as the original Draft and Final EIS, except that a new

scoping process is not required.

5 years from the date of the Final EIS approval, reevaluation of the

documentation should be accomplished to ensure its continued validity.

Sec. 989.21 Record of decision (ROD).

(a) The proponent and the EPF prepare a draft ROD, formally staff

it through the MAJCOM EPC, to HQ USAF/ILEV for verification of

adequacy, and forwards it to the final decision-maker for signature. A

ROD (40 CFR 1505.2) is a concise public document stating what an

agency's decision is on a specific action. The ROD may be integrated

into any other document required to implement the agency's decision. A

decision on a course of action may not be made until 30 days after

publication of the NOA of the final EIS in the Federal Register.

(b) The Air Force must announce the ROD to the affected public as

specified in Sec. 989.23, except for classified portions. The ROD

should be concise and should explain the conclusion, the reason for the

selection, and the alternatives considered. The ROD must identify the

course of action, whether it is the proposed action or an alternative,

that is considered environmentally preferable regardless of whether it

is the alternative selected for implementation. The ROD should

summarize all the major factors the agency weighed in making its

decision, including essential considerations of national policy.

practicable means to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental impacts

and, if not, explain why.

Sec. 989.22 Mitigation.

(a) When preparing EIAP documents, indicate clearly whether

mitigation measures (40 CFR 1508.20) must be implemented for the

alternative selected. Discuss mitigation measures in terms of ``will''

and ``would'' when such measures have already been incorporated into

the proposal. Use terms like ``may'' and ``could'' when proposing or

suggesting mitigation measures. Both the public and the Air Force

community need to know what commitments are being considered and

selected, and who will be responsible for implementing, funding, and

monitoring the mitigation measures.

(b) The proponent funds and implements mitigation measures in the

mitigation plan that is approved by the decision-maker. Where possible

and appropriate because of amount, the proponent should include the

cost of mitigation as a line item in the budget for a proposed project.

The proponent must keep the EPF informed of the status of mitigation

measures when the proponent implements the action. The EPF monitors the

progress of mitigation implementation and reports its status, through

the MAJCOM, to HQ USAF/ILEV when requested. Upon request, the EPF must

also provide the results of relevant mitigation monitoring to the

public.

significant environmental impacts found during preparation of an EA, in

lieu of preparing an EIS. The FONSI for the EA must include these

mitigation measures. Such mitigations are legally binding and must be

carried out as the proponent implements the project. If, for any

reason, the project proponent later abandons or revises in

environmentally-adverse ways the mitigation commitments made in the

FONSI, the proponent must prepare a supplemental EIAP document before

continuing the project. If potentially significant environmental

impacts would result from any project revisions, the proponent must

prepare an EIS.

(d) For each FONSI or ROD containing mitigation measures, the

proponent prepares a plan specifically identifying each mitigation,

discussing how the proponent will execute the mitigations, identifying

who will fund and implement the mitigations, and stating when the

proponent will complete the mitigation. The mitigation plan will be

forwarded, through the MAJCOM EPF to HQ USAF/ILEV for review within 90

days from the date of signature of the FONSI or ROD.

Sec. 989.23 Contractor prepared documents.

All Air Force EIAP documents belong to and are the responsibility

of the Air Force. EIAP correspondence and documents distributed outside

of the Air Force should generally be signed out by Air Force personnel

and documents should reflect on the cover sheet they are an Air Force

document. Contractor preparation information should be contained within

the document's list of preparers.

Sec. 989.24 Public notification.

Except as provided in Sec. 989.26, public notification is required

for various aspects of the EIAP.

(a) Activities that require public notification include:

(1) An EA and FONSI.

(2) An EIS NOI.

(3) Public scoping meetings.

(4) Availability of the draft EIS.

(5) Public hearings on the draft EIS (which should be included in

the NOA for the draft EIS).

(6) Availability of the final EIS.

(7) The ROD for an EIS.

(b) For actions of local concern, the list of possible notification

methods in 40 CFR 1506.6(b)(3) is only illustrative. The EPF may use

other equally effective means of notification as a substitute for any

of the methods listed. Because many Air Force actions are of limited

interest to persons or organizations outside the Air Force, the EPF may

limit local notification to the SPOC, local government representatives,

and local news media. For all actions covered under Sec. 989.15(e)(2),

and for EIS notices, the public affairs office must purchase with EPF

funds an advertisement in a prominent section of the local newspaper(s)

of general circulation (not ``legal'' newspapers or ``legal section''

of general newspapers).

local notification when it sends written notification to the state SPOC

or other equivalent agency (date of letter of notification).

Sec. 989.25 Base closure and realignment.

Base closure or realignment may entail special requirements for

environmental analysis. The permanent base closure and realignment law,

10 U.S.C. 2687, requires a report to the Congress when an installation

where at least 300 DoD civilian personnel are authorized to be employed

is closed, or when a realignment reduces such an installation by at

least 50 percent or 1,000 of such personnel, whichever is less. In

addition, other base closure laws may be in effect during particular

periods. Such non-permanent closure laws frequently contain provisions

limiting the extent of environmental analysis required for actions

taken under them. Such provisions may also add requirements for studies

not necessarily required by NEPA.

Sec. 989.26 Classified actions (40 CFR 1507.3(c)).

(a) Classification of an action for national defense or foreign

policy purposes does not relieve the requirement of complying with

NEPA. In classified matters, the Air Force must prepare and make

available normal NEPA environmental analysis documents to aid in the

decision making process; however, Air Force staff must prepare,

safeguard and disseminate these documents according to established

procedures for protecting classified documents. IF an EIAP

[[Page 67315]]

document must be classified, the Air Force may modify or eliminate

associated requirements for public notice (including publication in the

Federal Register) or public involvement in the EIAP. However, the Air

Force should obtain comments on classified proposed actions or

classified aspects of generally unclassified actions, from public

agencies having jurisdiction by law or special expertise, to the extent

that such review and comment is consistent with security requirements.

Where feasible, the EPF may need to help appropriate personnel from

those agencies obtain necessary security clearances to gain access to

documents so they can comment on scoping or review the documents.

(b) Where the proposed action is classified and unavailable to the

public, the Air Force may keep the entire NEPA process classified and

protected under the applicable procedures for the classification level

pertinent to the particular information. At times (for example, during

weapons system development and base closures and realignments), certain

but not all aspects of NEPA documents may later be declassified. In

those cases, the EPF should organize the EIAP documents, to the extent

practicable, in a way that keeps the most sensitive classified

information (which is not expected to be released at any early date) in

a separate annex that can remain classified; the rest of the EIAP

documents, when declassified, will then be comprehensible as a unit and

suitable for release to the public. Thus, the documents will reflect,

as much as possible, the nature of the action and its environmental

impacts, as well as Air Force compliance with NEPA requirements.

aspects of it need to be protected by security classification, the EPF

should tailor the EIAP for a proposed action to permit as normal a

level of public involvement as possible, but also fully protect the

classified part of the action and environmental analysis. In some

instances, the EPF can do this by keeping the classified sections of

the EIAP documents in a separate, classified annex.

(d) For Sec. 989.26(b) actions, and NOI or NOA will not be

published in the Federal Register until the proposed action is

declassified. For Sec. 989.26(c) actions, the Federal Register will run

an unclassified NOA which will advise the public that at some time in

the future the Air Force may or will publicly release a declassified

document.

(e) The EPF similarly protects classified aspects of FONSIs, RODs,

or other environmental documents that are part of the EIAP for a

proposed action, such as by preparing separate classified annexes to

unclassified documents, as necessary.

(f) Whenever a proponent believes that EIAP documents should be

kept classified, the EPF must make a report of the matter to SAF/MIQ,

including proposed modifications of the normal EIAP to protect

classified information. The EPF may make such submissions at whatever

level of security classification is needed to provide a comprehensive

understanding of the issues. SAF/MIQ, with support from SAF/GC and

other staff elements as necessary, makes final decisions on EIAP

procedures for classified actions.

Sec. 989.27 Occupational safety and health.

Assess direct and indirect impacts of proposed actions on the

safety and health of Air Force employees and others at a work site. The

EIAP document does not need to specify compliance procedures. However,

the EIAP documents should discuss impacts that require a change in work

practices to achieve an adequate level of health and safety.

Sec. 989.28 Airspace and range proposals.

(a) EIAP Review. Airspace and range proposals require review by HQ

USAF/XOO prior to public announcement and implementation by a

proponent. Unless directed otherwise, the airspace proponent will

forward the DOPAA as an attachment to the proposal sent to HQ USAF/XOO.

EAs and EISs prepared as part of airspace and range proposals will be

forwarded to HQ USAF/XOO for review at the preliminary draft and

preliminary final stages. AF/XOO will be responsible for appropriate HQ

USAF ESOHC review.

(b) Federal Aviation Administration. The DoD and the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) have entered into a Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) that outlines various airspace responsibilities.

For purposes of compliance with NEPA, the DoD is the ``lead agency''

for all proposals initiated by DoD, with the FAA acting as the

``cooperating agency.'' Where airspace proposals initiated by the FAA

affect military use, the roles are reversed. The proponent's action

officers (civil engineering and local airspace management) must ensure

that the FAA is fully integrated into the airspace proposals and

related EIAP from the very beginning and that the action officers

review the FAA's responsibilities as a cooperating agency. The

proponent's airspace manager develops the preliminary airspace proposal

per appropriate FAA handbooks and the FAA-DoD MOU. The preliminary

airspace proposal is the basis for initial dialogue between DoD and the

FAA on the proposed action. A close working relationship between DoD

and the FAA, through the FAA regional Air Force representative, greatly

facilitates the airspace proposal process and helps resolve many NEPA

issues during the EIAP.

Sec. 989.29 Force structure and unit move proposals.

Unless directed otherwise, the MAJCOM plans and programs proponent

will forward a copy of all EAs for force structure and unit moves to HQ

USAF/ILXB for information only at the preliminary draft and preliminary

final stages.

Sec. 989.30 Air quality.

Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 42 U.S.C.

7506(c), establishes a conformity requirement for Federal agencies

which has been implemented by regulation, 40 CFR part 93, subpart B.

All EIAP documents must address applicable conformity requirements and

the status of compliance. Conformity applicability analyses and

determinations are developed in parallel with EIAP documents, but are

separate and distinct requirements and should be documented separately.

To increase the utility of a conformity determination in performing the

EIAP, the conformity determination should be completed prior to the

completion of the EIAP so as to allow incorporation of the information

from the conformity determination into the EIAP. See AFI 32-7040, Air

Quality Compliance.\12\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 989.31 Pollution prevention.

The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 13101(b),

established a national policy to prevent or reduce pollution at the

source, whenever feasible. Pollution prevention approaches should be

applied to all pollution-generating activities. The environmental

document should analyze potential pollution that may result from the

proposed action and alternatives and must discuss potential pollution

prevention measures when such measures are feasible for incorporation

into the proposal or alternatives. Where pollution cannot be prevented,

the environmental analysis and proposed mitigation measures should

include, wherever possible,

[[Page 67316]]

recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and environmentally safe

disposal actions (see AFI 32-7080, Pollution Prevention Program \13\).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 989.32 Noise.

Aircraft noise data files used for analysis during EIAP will be

submitted to HQ AFCEE for review and validation prior to public

release, and upon completion of the EIAP for database entry. Utilize

the current NOISEMAP computer program for air installations and the

Assessment System for Aircraft Noise for military training routes and

military operating areas. Guidance on standardized Air Force noise data

development and analysis procedures is available from HQ AFCEE/EC.

Develop EIAP land use analysis relating to aircraft noise impacts

originating from air installations following procedures in AFI 32-

70653, Air Installation Compatible Use Zone.\14\ Draft EIAP aircraft

noise/land use analysis associated with air installations will be

coordinated with the MAJCOM AICUZ program manager.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\14\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 989.33 Environmental justice.

During the preparation of environmental analyses under this

instruction, the EPF should ensure compliance with the provisions of

E.O. 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in

Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, and Executive

Memorandum of February 11, 1994, regarding E.O. 12898.

Sec. 989.34 Special and emergency procedures.

(a) Special procedures. During the EIAP, unique situations may

arise that require EIAP strategies different than those set forth in

this part. These situations may warrant modification of the procedures

in this part. EPFs should only consider procedural deviations when the

resulting process would benefit the Air Force and still comply with

NEPA and CEQ regulations. EPFs must forward all requests for procedural

deviations to HQ USAF/ILEV (or ANGRC/CEV) for review and approval by

SAF/MIQ.

(b) Emergency procedures (40 CFR 1506.11). Emergency situations do

not exempt the Air Force from complying with NEPA, but do allow

emergency response while completing the EIAP. Certain emergency

situations may make it necessary to take immediate action having

significant environmental impact, without observing all the provisions

of the CEQ regulations or this part. If possible, promptly notify HQ

USAF/ILEV, for SAF/MIQ coordination and CEQ consultation, before

undertaking emergency actions that would otherwise not comply with NEPA

or this part. The immediate notification requirement does not apply

where emergency action must be taken without delay. Coordination in

this instance must take place as soon as practicable.

Sec. 989.35 Reporting requirements.

(a) EAs, EISs, and mitigation measures will be tracked at bases and

MAJCOMs through an appropriate environmental management system.

(b) Proponents, EPFs, and public affairs offices may utilize the

world wide web, in addition to more traditional means, to notify the

public of availability of EAs and EISs. When possible, allow

distribution of documents electronically. Public review comments should

be required in writing, rather than by electronic mail.

139, Records Disposition--Standards.\15\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 989.1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 989.36 Waivers.

In order to deal with unusual circumstances and to allow growth in

the NEPA process, SAF/MIQ may grant waivers to those procedures

contained in this instruction not required by NEPA or the CEQ

Regulations. Such waivers shall not be used to limit compliance with

NEPA or the CEQ Regulations but only to substitute other, more suitable

procedures relative to the context of the particular action. Such

waivers may also be granted on occasion to allow experimentation in

procedures in order to allow growth in the EIAP. This authority may not

be delegated.

Sec. 989.37 Procedures for analysis abroad.

Procedures for analysis of environmental actions abroad are

contained in 32 CFR part 187. That directive provides comprehensive

policies, definitions, and procedures for implementing E.O. 12114. For

analysis of Air Force actions abroad, 32 CFR part 187 will be followed.

Sec. 989.38 Requirements for analysis abroad.

The EPF will generally perform the same functions for analysis of

actions abroad that it performs in the United States. In addition to

the requirements of 32 CFR part 187, the following Air Force specific

rules apply.

(a) For EAs dealing with global commons (geographic areas beyond

the jurisdiction of the United States or any foreign nation) HQ USAF/

ILEV will review actions that are above the MAJCOM approval authority.

In this instance, approval authority refers to the same approval

authority that would apply to an EA in the United States. The EPF

documents a decision not to do an EIS.

(b) For EISs dealing with the global commons, the EPF provides

sufficient copies to HQ USAF/ILEV for the HQ USAF ESOHC review and

AFCEE/EC technical review. After ESOHC review, the EPF makes a

recommendation as to whether the proposed draft EIS will be released as

a draft EIS.

when appropriate, environmental studies and reviews to HQ USAF/ILEV for

coordination among appropriate federal agencies. HQ USAF/ILEV makes

environmental studies and reviews available to the Department of State

and other interested federal agencies, and, on request, to the United

States public, in accordance with 32 CFR part 187. HQ USAF/ILEV also

may inform interested foreign governments or furnish copies of studies,

in accordance with 32 CFR part 187.

Attachment 1 to Part 989--Glossary of References, Abbreviations,

Acronyms, and Terms

References--Legislative

10 U.S.C. 2687, Base Closures and Realignments

42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

42 U.S.C. 7506(c), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

42 U.S.C. 13101(b), Pollution Prevention Act of 1990

43 U.S.C. 155-158, Engle Act

Executive Orders

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, May 24, 1977

Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, May 24, 1977

Executive Order 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal

Actions, January 4, 1979

Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,

July 14, 1982

Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental

Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, February

11, 1994

U.S. Government Agency Publications

Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the

Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 40

CFR parts 1500-1508

Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 4715.1, Environmental

Security

Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 6050.7, Environmental Effects

Abroad of Major Department of Defense Actions, March 31, 1979 (32

CFR part 187)

[[Page 67317]]

Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 4715.9, Environmental

Planning and Analysis

DoDD 5000.1, Defense Acquisition

Department of Defense 5000.2-R, Mandatory Procedures for Major

Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs) and Major Automated Information

Systems (MAIS) Acquisition Programs, with Change 1

Air Force Publications

AFPD 32-70, Environmental Quality

AFI 32-1021, Planning and Programming of Facility Construction

Projects

AFI 32-7002, Environmental Information Management System

AFI 32-7005, Environmental Protection Committees

AFI 32-7040, Air Quality Compliance

AFI 32-7062, Air Force Comprehensive Planning

AFI 32-7063, Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Program

AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management

AFI 32-7080, Pollution Prevention Program

AFI 35-202, Environmental Community Involvement

AFI 35-205, Air Force Security and Policy Review Program

AFMAN 37-139, Records Disposition--Standards

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or acronym, and definition:

AFCEE Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence

AFCEE/EC Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence/

Environmental Conservation and Planning Directorate

AFI Air Force Instruction

AFLSA/JACE Air Force Legal Services Agency/Environmental Law and

Litigation Division

AFLSA/JAJT Air Force Legal Services Agency/Trial Judiciary Division

AFMAN Air Force Manual

AFMOA/SG Air Force Medical Operations Agency/Aerospace Medicine

Office

AFPD Air Force Policy Directive

AFRES Air Force Reserve

ANG Air National Guard

ANGRC Air National Guard Readiness Center

CATEX Ctegorical Exclusion

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DoD Department of Defense

DoDD Department of Defense Directive

DoDI Department of Defense Instruction

DOPAA Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives

EA Environmental Assessment

EIAP Environmental Impact Analysis Process

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

E.O. Executive Order

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EPC Environmental Protection Committee

EPF Environmental Planning Function

ESOHC Environmental Safety and Occupational Health Committee

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement

FOA Field Operating Agency

FONPA Finding of No Practicable Alternative

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact

GSA General Services Administration

HG AFMC Headquarters, Air Force Materiel Command

HQ USAF Headquarters, United States Air Force

HQ USAF/ILE The Air Force Civil Engineer

MAJCOM Major Command

MGM Materiel Group Manager

MOA Military Operating Area

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MSL Mean Sea Level

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

NGB-CF National Guard Bureau Air Directorate

NGB-JA National Guard Bureau Office of the Staff Judge Advocate

NGB-PA National Guard Bureau Office of Public Affairs

NOA Notice of Availability

NOI Notice of Intent

OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PDEIS Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement

PGM Product Group Manager

REO Air Force Regional Environmental Office

ROD Record of Decision

SAF/AQR Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Science,

Technology, and Engineering)

SAF/GC Air Force General Counsel

SAF/LL Air Force Office of Legislative Liaison

SAF/MI Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve

Affairs, Installations, and Environment

SAF/MIQ Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Environment,

Safety, and Occupational Health)

SAF/PA Air Force Office of Public Affairs

SJA Staff Judge Advocate

SM Single Manager

SPD Single Program Director

SPOC Single Point of Contact

TDY Temporary Duty

U.S.C. United States Code

Terms

Note: All definitions in the CEQ Regulations, 40 CFR part 1508,

apply to this part. In addition, the following definitions apply:

Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives (DOPAA)--An Air

Force document that is the framework for assessing the environmental

impact of a proposal. It describes the purpose and need for the

action, the alternatives to be considered, and the rationale used to

arrive at the proposed action. The DOPAA often unfolds as writing

progresses. The DOPAA can change during the internal scoping and

public scoping process, especially as ideas and issues become

clearer, and as new information makes changes necessary.

Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP)--The Air Force

program that implements the requirements of NEPA and requirements

for analysis of environmental effects abroad under E.O. 12114.

Finding of No Practicable Alternative (FONPA)--Finding contained

in a FONSI or ROD, according to Executive Orders 11988 and 11990,

that explains why there are no practicable alternatives to an action

affecting a wetland or floodplain, based on appropriate EIAP

analysis or other documentation.

Interdisciplinary--An approach to environmental analysis

involving more than one discipline or branch of learning.

Pollution Prevention--``Source reduction'', as defined under the

Pollution Prevention Act, and other practices that reduce or

eliminate pollutants through increased efficiency in the use of raw

materials, energy, water, or other resources, or in the protection

of natural resources by conservation.

Proponent--Any office, unit, or activity that proposes to

initiate an action.

Scoping--A process for proposing alternatives to be addressed

and for identifying the significant issues related to a proposed

action. Scoping includes affirmative efforts to communicate with

other federal agencies, state, Tribal, and local governments, and

the public.

Single Manager--Any one of the Air Force designated weapon

system program managers, that include System Program Directors

(SPDs), Product Group Managers (PGMs), and Materiel Group Managers

(MGM).

United States--All states, commonwealths, the District of

Columbia, territories and possessions of the United States, and all

waters and airspace subject to the territorial jurisdiction of the

United States. The territories and possessions of the United States

include American Samoa, Guam, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef, Midway

Island, Navassa Island, Palmyra Island, the Virgin Islands, and Wake

Island.

Attachment 2 to Part 989--Categorical Exclusions

A2.1. Proponent/EPF Responsibility. Although a proposed action

may qualify for a categorical exclusion from the requirements for

environmental impact analysis under NEPA, this exclusion does not

relieve the EPF or the proponent of responsibility for complying

with all other environmental requirements related to the proposal,

including requirements for permits, state regulatory agency review

of plans, and so on.

A2.2. Additional Analysis. Circumstances may arise in which

usually categorically excluded actions may have a significant

environmental impact and, therefore, may generate a requirement for

further environmental analysis. Examples of situations where such

unique circumstances may be present include:

A2.2.1. Actions of greater scope or size than generally

experienced for a particularly category of action.

A2.2.2. Potential for degradation (even though slight) of

already marginal or poor environmental conditions.

A2.2.3. Initiating a degrading influence, activity, or effect in

areas not already significantly modified from their natural

condition.

A2.2.4. Use of unproved technology.

A2.2.5. Use of hazardous or toxic substances that may come in

contact with the surrounding environment.

[[Page 67318]]

A2.2.6. Presence of threatened or endangered species,

archaeological remains, historical sites, or other protected

resources.

A2.2.7. Proposals adversely affecting areas of critical

environmental concern, such as prime or unique agricultural lands,

wetlands, coastal zones, wilderness areas, floodplains, or wild and

scenic river areas.

A2.2.8. Proposals with significant and adverse environmental

effects on minority and low-income populations.

A2.3. CATEX List. Actions that are categorically excluded in the

absence of unique circumstances are:

A2.3.1. Routine procurement of goods and services.

A2.3.2. Routine Commissary and Exchange operations.

A2.3.3. Routine recreational and welfare activities.

A2.3.4. Normal personnel, fiscal or budgeting, and

administrative activities and decisions including those involving

military and civilian personnel (for example, recruiting,

processing, paying, and records keeping).

A2.3.5. Preparing, revising, or adopting regulations,

instructions, directives, or guidance documents that do not,

themselves, result in an action being taken.

A2.3.6. Preparing, revising, or adopting regulations,

instructions, directives, or guidance documents that implement

(without substantial change) the regulations, instructions,

directives, or guidance documents from higher headquarters or other

Federal agencies with superior subject matter jurisdiction.

A2.3.7. Continuation or resumption of pre-existing actions,

where there is no substantial change in existing conditions or

existing land uses and where the actions were originally evaluated

in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and surrounding

circumstances have not changed.

A2.3.8. Performing interior and exterior construction within the

5-foot line of a building without changing the land use of the

existing building.

A2.3.9. Repairing and replacing real property installed

equipment.

A2.3.10. Routine facility maintenance and repair that does not

involve disturbing significant quantities of hazardous materials

such as asbestos and lead-based paint.

A2.3.11. Actions similar to other actions which have been

determined to have an insignificant impact in a similar setting as

established in an EIS or an EA resulting in a FONSI. The EPF must

document application of this CATEX on AF Form 813, specifically

identifying the previous Air Force approved environmental document

which provides the basis for this determination.

A2.3.12. Installing, operating, modifying, and routinely

repairing and replacing utility and communications systems, data

processing cable, and similar electronic equipment that use existing

rights of way, easements, distribution systems, or facilities.

A2.3.13. Installing or modifying airfield operational equipment

(such as runway visual range equipment, visual glide path systems,

and remote transmitter or receiver facilities) on airfield property

and usually accessible only to maintenance personnel.

A2.3.14. Installing on previously developed land, equipment that

does not substantially alter land use (i.e., land use of more than

one acre). This includes outgrants to private lessees for similar

construction. The EPF must document application of this CATEX on AF

Form 813.

A2.3.15. Laying-away or mothballing a production facility or

adopting a reduced maintenance level at a closing installation when

(1) agreement on any required historic preservation effort has been

reached with the state historic preservation officer and the

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and (2) no degradation in

the environmental restoration program will occur.

A2.3.16. Acquiring land and ingrants (50 acres or less) for

activities otherwise subject to CATEX. The EPF must document

application of this CATEX on AF Form 813.

A2.3.17. Transferring land, facilities, and personal property

for which the General Services Administration (GSA) is the action

agency. Such transfers are excluded only if there is no change in

land use and GSA complies with its NEPA requirements.

A2.3.18. Transferring administrative control of real property

within the Air Force or to another military department or to another

Federal agency, not including GSA, including returning public domain

lands to the Department of the Interior.

A2.3.19. Granting easements, leases, licenses, rights of entry,

and permits to use Air Force controlled property for activities

that, if conducted by the Air Force, could be categorically excluded

in accordance with this attachment. The EPF must document

application of this CATEX on AF Form 813.

A2.3.20. Converting in-house services to contract services.

A2.3.21. Routine personnel decreases and increases, including

work force conversion to either on-base contractor operation or to

military operation from contractor operation (excluding base closure

and realignment actions which are subject to congressional reporting

under 10 U.S.C. 2687).

A2.3.22. Routine, temporary movement of personnel, including

deployments of personnel on a temporary duty (TDY) basis where

existing facilities are used.

A2.3.23. Personnel reductions resulting from workload

adjustments, reduced personnel funding levels, skill imbalances, or

other similar causes.

A2.3.24. Study efforts that involve no commitment of resources

other than personnel and funding allocations.

A2.3.25. The analysis and assessment of the natural environment

without altering it (inspections, audits, surveys, investigations).

This CATEX includes the granting of any permits necessary for such

surveys, provided that the technology or procedure involved is well

understood and there are no adverse environmental impacts

anticipated from it. The EPF must document application of this CATEX

on AF Form 813.

A2.3.26. Undertaking specific investigatory activities to

support remedial action activities for purposes of cleanup of

Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) and Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action sites. These

activities include soil borings and sampling, installation, and

operation of test or monitoring wells. This CATEX applies to studies

that assist in determining final cleanup actions when they are

conducted in accordance with legal agreements, administrative

orders, or work plans previously agreed to by EPA or state

regulators.

A2.3.27. Normal or routine basic and applied scientific research

confined to the laboratory and in compliance with all applicable

safety, environmental, and natural resource conservation laws.

A2.3.28. Routine transporting of hazardous materials and wastes

in accordance with applicable Federal, state, interstate, and local

laws.

A2.3.29. Emergency handling and transporting of small quantities

of chemical surety material or suspected chemical surety material,

whether or not classified as hazardous or toxic waste, from a

discovery site to a permitted storage, treatment, or disposal

facility.

A2.3.30. Immediate responses to the release or discharge of oil

or hazardous materials in accordance with an approved Spill

Prevention and Response Plan or Spill Contingency Plan or that are

otherwise consistent with the requirements of the National

Contingency Plan.

A2.3.31. Relocating a small number of aircraft to an

installation with similar aircraft that does not result in a

significant increase of total flying hours or the total number of

aircraft operations, a change in flight tracks, or an increase in

permanent personnel or logistics support requirements at the

receiving installation. Repetitive use of this CATEX at an

installation requires further analysis to determine there are no

cumulative impacts. The EPF must document application of this CATEX

on AF Form 813.

A2.3.32. Temporary (for less than 30 days) increases in air

operations up to 50 percent of the typical installation aircraft

operation rate or increases of 50 operations a day, whichever is

greater. Repetitive use of this CATEX at an installation requires

further analysis to determine there are no cumulative impacts.

A2.3.33. Flying activities that comply with the Federal aviation

regulations, that are dispersed over a wide area and that do not

frequently (more than once a day) pass near the same ground points.

This CATEX does not cover regular activity on established routes or

within special use airspace.

A2.3.34. Supersonic flying operations over land and above 30,000

feet MSL, or over water and above 10,000 feet MSL and more than 15

nautical miles from land.

A2.3.35. Formal requests to the FAA, or host-nation equivalent

agency, to establish or modify special use airspace (for example,

restricted areas, warning areas, military operating areas) and

military training routes for subsonic operations that have a base

altitude of 3,000 feet above ground level or higher. The EPF must

document application of this CATEX on AF Form 813, which must

accompany the request to the FAA.

A2.3.36. Adopting airfield approach, departure, and en route

procedures that are less than 3,000 feet above ground level, and

that also do not route air traffic over noise-

[[Page 67319]]

sensitive areas, including residential neighborhoods or cultural,

historical, and outdoor recreational areas. The EPF may

categorically exclude such air traffic patterns at or greater than

3,000 feet above ground level regardless of underlying land use.

A2.3.37. Participating in ``air shows'' and fly-overs by Air

Force aircraft at non-Air Force public events after obtaining FAA

coordination and approval.

A2.3.38. Conducting Air Force ``open houses'' and similar

events, including air shows, golf tournaments, home shows, and the

like, where crowds gather at an Air Force installation, so long as

crowd and traffic control, etc., have not in the past presented

significant safety or environmental impacts.

Attachment 3 to Part 989--Procedures for Holding Public Hearings on

Draft Environmental Impact statements (EIS)

A.3.1. General Information:

A3.1.1. The Office of the Judge Advocate General, through the

Air Force Legal Services Agency/Trial Judiciary Division (AFLSA/

JAJT) and its field organization, is responsible for conducting

public hearings and assuring verbatim transcripts are accomplished.

A3.1.2. The EPF, with proponent, AFLSA/JAJT, and Public Affairs

support, establishes the date and location, arranges for hiring the

court reporter, funds temporary duty costs for the hearing officer,

makes logistical arrangements (for example, publishing notices,

arranging for press coverage, obtaining tables and chairs, etc.).

A3.1.3. The procedures outlined below have proven themselves

through many prior applications. However, there may be rare

instances when circumstances warrant conducting public hearings

under a different format, e.g., public/town meeting, information

booths, third party moderator, etc. In these cases, forward a

request with justification to deviate from these procedures to USAF/

ILEVP for SAF/MIQ approval.

A3.2. Notice of Hearing (40 CFR 1506.6):

A3.2.1. Public Affairs officers:

A3.2.1.1. Announce public hearings and assemble a mailing list

of individuals to be invited.

A3.2.1.2. Distribute announcements of a hearing to all

interested individuals and agencies, including the print and

electronic media.

A3.2.1.3. Place a newspaper display advertisement announcing the

time and place of the hearing as well as other pertinent

particulars.

A3.2.1.4. Distribute the notice in a timely manner so it will

reach recipients or be published at least 15 days before the hearing

date. Distribute notices fewer than 15 days before the hearing date

when you have substantial justification and if the justification for

a shortened notice period appears in the notice.

A3.2.1.5. Develop and distribute news release.

A3.2.2. If an action has effects of national concern, publish

notices in the Federal Register and mail notices to national

organizations that have an interest in the matter.

A3.2.2.1. Because of the longer lead time required by the

Federal Register, send out notices for publication in the Federal

hearing date.

A3.2.3. The notice should include:

A3.2.3.1. Date, time, place, and subject of the hearing.

A3.2.3.2. A description of the general format of the hearing.

A3.2.3.3. The name and telephone number of a person to contact

for more information.

A3.2.3.4. A suggestion that speakers submit (in writing or by

return call) their intention to participate, with an indication of

which environmental impact (or impacts) they wish to address.

A3.2.3.5. Any limitation on the length of oral statements.

A3.2.3.6. A suggestion that speakers submit statements of

considerable length in writing.

A3.2.3.7. A summary of the proposed action.

A3.2.3.8. The location where the Draft EIS and any appendices

are available for examination.

A.3.3. Availability of the Draft EIS to the Public. The EPF

makes copies of the Draft EIS available to the public at an Air

Force installation and other reasonably accessible place in the

vicinity of the proposed action and public hearing (e.g., public

library).

A3.4. Place of the Hearing. The EPF arranges to hold the hearing

at a time and place and in an area readily accessible to military

and civilian organizations and individuals interested in the

proposed action. Generally, the EPF should arrange to hold the

hearing in an off-base civilian facility, which is more accessible

to the public.

A3.5. Hearing Officer:

A3.5.1. The AFLSA/JAJT selects a military trial judge to preside

over hearings. The hearing officer does not need to have personal

knowledge of the project, other than familiarity with the Draft EIS.

In no event should the hearing officer be a judge advocate from the

proponent or subordinate command, be assigned to the same

installation with which the hearing is concerned, or have

participated personally in the development of the project, or have

rendered legal advice or assistance with respect to it (or be

expected to do so in the future). The principal qualification of the

hearing officer should be the ability to conduct a hearing as an

impartial participant.

A3.5.2. The primary duties of the hearing officer are to make

sure that the hearing is orderly, is recorded, and that interested

parties have a reasonable opportunity to speak. The presiding

officer should direct the speakers' attention to the purpose of the

hearing, which is to consider the environmental impacts of the

proposed project. Speakers should have a time limit to ensure

maximum public input to the decision-maker.

A3.6. Record of the Hearing. The EIS preparation team must make

sure a verbatim transcribed record of the hearing is prepared,

including all stated positions, all questions, and all responses.

The EIS preparation team should append all written submissions that

parties provide to the hearing officer during the hearing to the

record as attachments. The EIS preparation team should also append a

list of persons who spoke at the hearing and submitted written

comments and a list of the organizations or interests they represent

with addresses. The EIS preparation team must make sure a verbatim

transcript of the hearing is provided to the EPF for inclusion as an

appendix to the Final EIS. The officer should also ensure that all

persons who request a copy of the transcript get a copy when it is

completed. Copying charges are determined according to 40 CFR

1506.6(f).

A3.7. Hearing Format. Use the format outlined below as a general

guideline for conducting a hearing. Hearing officers should tailor

the format to meet the hearing objectives. These objectives provide

information to the public, record opinions of interested persons on

environmental impacts of the proposed action, and set out

alternatives for improving the EIS and for later consideration.

A3.7.1. Record of Attendees. The hearing officer should make a

list of all persons who wish to speak at the hearing to help the

hearing officer in calling on these individuals, to ensure an

accurate transcript of the hearing, and to enable the officer to

send a copy of the Final EIS (40 CFR 1502.19) to any person,

organization, or agency that provided substantive comments at the

hearing. The hearing officer should assign assistants to the

entrance of the hearing room to provide cards on which individuals

can voluntarily write their names, addresses, telephone numbers,

organizations they represent, and titles; whether they desire to

make a statement at the hearing; and what environmental area(s) they

wish to address. The hearing officer can then use the cards to call

on individuals who desire to make statements. However, the hearing

officer will not deny entry to the hearing or the right to speak to

people who decline to submit this information on cards.

A3.7.2. Introductory Remarks. The hearing officer should first

introduce himself or herself and the EIS preparation team. Then the

hearing officer should make a brief statement on the purpose of the

hearing and give the general ground rules on how it will be

conducted. This is the proper time to welcome any dignitaries who

are present. The hearing officer should explain that he or she does

not make any recommendation or decision on whether the proposed

project should be continued, modified, or abandoned or how the EIS

should be prepared.

A3.7.3. Explanation of the Proposed Action. The Air Force EIS

preparation team representative should next explain the proposed

action, the alternatives, the potential environmental consequences,

and the EIAP.

A3.7.4. Questions by Attendees. After the EIS team

representative explains the proposed action, alternatives, and

consequences, the hearing officer should give attendees a chance to

ask questions to clarify points they may not have understood. The

EIS preparation team may have to reply in writing, at a later date,

to some of the questions. While the Air Force EIS preparation team

should be as responsive as possible in answering questions about the

proposal, they should not become involved

[[Page 67320]]

in debate the questioners over the merits of the proposed action.

Cross-examination of speakers, either those of the Air Force or the

public, is not the purpose of an informal hearing. If necessary, the

hearing officer may limit questioning or conduct portions of the

hearing to ensure proper lines of inquiry. However, the hearing

officer should include all questions in the hearing record.

A3.7.5. Statement of Attendees. The hearing officer must give

the persons attending the hearing a chance to present oral or

written statements. The hearing officer should be sure the recorder

has the name and address of each person who submits an oral or

written statement. The officer should also permit the attendees to

submit written statements within a reasonable time, usually two

weeks, following the hearing. The officer should allot a reasonable

length of time at the hearing for receiving oral statements. The

officer may waive any announced time limit at his or her discretion.

The hearing officer may allow those who have not previously

indicated a desire to speak to identify themselves and be recognized

only after those who have previously indicated their intentions to

speak have spoken.

A3.7.6 Ending or Extending a Hearing. The hearing officer has

the power to end the hearing if the hearing becomes disorderly, if

the speakers become repetitive, or for other good cause. In any such

case, the hearing officer must make a statement for the record on

the reasons for terminating the hearing. The hearing officer may

also extend the hearing beyond the originally announced date and

time. The officer should announce the extension to a later date or

time during the hearing and prior to the hearing if possible.

A3.8. Adjourning the Hearing. After all persons have had a

chance to speak, when the hearing has culled a representative view

of public opinion, or when the time set for the hearing and any

reasonable extension of time has ended, the hearing officer adjourns

the hearing. In certain circumstances (for example, if the hearing

officer believes it is likely that some participants will introduce

new and relevant information), the hearing officer may justify

scheduling an additional, separate hearing session. if the hearing

officer makes the decision to hold another hearing while presiding

over the original hearing he or she should announce that another

public hearing will be scheduled or is under consideration. The

officer gives notice of a decision to continue these hearings in

essentially the same way he or she announced the original hearing,

time permitting. The Public Affairs officer provides the required

public notices and directs notices to interested parties in

coordination with the hearing officer. Because of lead time

constraints, SAF/MIQ may waive Federal Register notice requirements

or advertisements in local publications. At the conclusion of the

hearing, the hearing officer should inform the attendees of the

deadline (usually 2 weeks) to submit additional written remarks in

the hearing record. The officer should also notify attendees of the

deadline for the commenting period of the Draft EIS.

Barbara A. Carmichael,

Alternate Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 97-33457 Filed 12-23-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3910-01-M

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.